Local leaders spent the second day of the San Benito County Board of Supervisors retreat on Feb. 15 discussing conflicts of interest and the Brown Act, a state law governing public meetings of local elected officials.
The San Benito County Planning Commission and San Juan Bautista City Council joined county supervisors for the daylong event, along with Hollister City Council members Marty Richman and Rolan Resendiz. San Juan Bautista Councilman Dan De Vries did not attend the retreat and Supervisor Jaime De La Cruz attended part of the retreat.
Attorney Judith Propp of Sloan Sakai Yeung & Wong, LLP gave a presentation on the Brown Act, and included what is appropriate for board members to speak about and when it is appropriate to speak to each other.
The Brown Act is a California law passed in 1953 that ensures the public’s right to attend and participate in meetings of local governing bodies, such as the City Council or Board of Supervisors. The act also prohibits members of governing bodies from discussing issues concerning their local government outside of public meetings.
Propp said it’s permitted for two supervisors to speak about government business, but did not recommend doing so because it would only take an additional supervisor to be included in the conversation to result in a quorum. That would be a violation of the Brown Act. Propp said that situation would qualify as a sequential meeting, which can occur via email, text, phone or through staff or representatives.
For example, Propp said County Administrative Officer Ray Espinosa can speak to supervisors individually, but can’t share the other supervisors’ views or positions on specific topics.
Propp also cautioned officials about using social media and blogs.
“Sharing your positions ahead of a public meeting when there will be information presented to you by staff, community and experts, it can be detrimental for Brown Act violations,” Propp said.
Supervisor Anthony Botelho asked whether supervisors can speak at public meetings where other supervisors serve, such as local transportation agency Council of San Benito County Governments (COG) and the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). Propp said if it’s about an agendized item, and so long as the supervisor speaks as an individual representing his or her own interests, it is allowed.
Closed session at public meetings was also discussed at the retreat. A closed session is a portion of a public meeting where elected leaders and staff discuss particular agendized topics in private.
Propp said permissible closed session agenda items include personnel matters (employment, evaluations), pending or potential litigation/legal advice, real estate negotiations and labor negotiations.
Supervisor Jim Gillio asked if there was a process to make items discussed in closed session public via board majority vote. County Counsel Barbara Thompson said the board would have to discuss and vote on the decision in closed session.
Discussion also arose surrounding conflicts of interest. Propp said conflicts of interest are also applicable to staff, and she suggested that any staff member be removed from a project in which there is potential for personal gain or loss. She also recommended that officials always disclose any real, perceived or potential conflict.
“You want to show the public you can be transparent and impartial,” Propp said.
Other related BenitoLink articles:
https://benitolinkcom.wpengine.com/board-supervisors-look-ahead-two-day-retreat
https://benitolinkcom.wpengine.com/new-hollister-city-council-members-cautioned-brown-act