Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Government Ethics topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council debates options for handling alleged Brown Act leaks; asks staff to consult DA and report back
Summary
Council members discussed reports that closed‑session information has been leaking and asked staff to research existing reporting mechanisms, contact the district attorney’s office for options and return with recommendations for how residents and staff can report possible Brown Act or ethics concerns.
A discussion requested by a council member about alleged Brown Act violations — specifically the leaking of closed‑session information — prompted a lengthy council exchange on reporting options, protections for whistleblowers and next steps.
The council member who requested the agenda item said members of the public have told them that closed‑session deliberations have been shared outside the closed room. “There are people who have verbatim stated to me comments and or decisions that were made in closed session, when they were not present there and they were not reported out,” the council member said, describing multiple similar reports over the prior months.
Council and staff discussed existing options for reporting potential violations, including contacting the city attorney, the county district attorney, the state Department of Justice, the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) and the grand jury. City Attorney Roy advised that ad hoc committees are advisory and that legal channels are available for review; he also cautioned that anonymity cannot always be guaranteed depending on the nature of the allegation and the legal process.
Several council members said they preferred that members of the public use outside enforcement channels when appropriate. Others said they preferred a city‑level route that would let citizens provide information to the council for screening and possible referral. One council member said the council should not ignore allegations and proposed creating a way for information to be delivered to the council, with clear rules about when staff or the city attorney would refer matters to enforcement agencies.
The council gave staff direction to research existing reporting mechanisms and to contact the district attorney’s office (or a DA unit that handles public integrity issues) to ask whether a county representative could brief council and the public at a future meeting. The council also asked staff to return with options for a possible reporting mechanism and a brochure or public guidance describing existing enforcement options.
Council members repeatedly stressed the advisory nature of any new council‑level mechanism and noted that formal investigations and criminal or administrative enforcement would be handled by independent authorities such as the DA, the FPPC or the grand jury.
