Public commenter alleges Brown Act violation, urges items be placed on consent agenda

A public commenter at the Committee on Commerce and Trade’s regular meeting said a recent council motion requiring additional disclosure amounts to a violation of the Brown Act and urged the committee to oppose the measure and place two related items on the consent agenda.

The session opened with the meeting moderator explaining public-comment rules, including signing up at the kiosk in the back and time limits of one minute for a single general comment or up to two minutes for multiple points. The moderator then invited Michael Ackerman to speak.

Ackerman argued that changes approved by the council last week ‘‘continues to be a violation of the Brown Act,’’ and added, in Spanish, ‘‘La divulgación no va a cambiarlo’’ ("Disclosure will not change it"). He also said prosecutors ‘‘do not care’’ about such breaches. Ackerman asked the committee to oppose the measure to protect public-comment rights and said he "quisiera proponer que pongamos esos 2 puntos en acuerdo de consenso" (he proposed placing the two items on the consent agenda).

Ackerman said Councilmember Park and Councilmember Rodríguez had voted yes on the matter and referenced a third councilmember as having voted yes as well; the commenter’s reference to the third member was unclear in the record. The remarks constituted public comment and a call for the committee to take a specific procedural step, but the transcript does not record any formal motion made by the committee or a vote on Ackerman’s request.

The meeting concluded after the public-comment period; the transcript contains no record of committee discussion, staff response, or subsequent action related to Ackerman’s allegations or his request to place items on the consent agenda.