California open government roundup: Seal Beach pledges commitment to transparency

In the wake of accusations that the Seal Beach City Council hid behind claims of “anticipated or threatened litigation” to escape public scrutiny, the council reaffirmed its dedication to transparency and the Brown Act. Critics contend that in a number of instances the council deprived the public of their right to participate in decisions, including a decision to approve a $120,000 contract with a Sacrament lobbying firm and one to move a historic home. (Los Angeles Times, April 4, 2016, by Matt Hamilton)

Citizens are upset that the Groveland Community Services District failed to publish minutes of a January 13 meeting to consider a controversial water rate increase. The citizens say that without documentation, an ordinance and minutes, there is a serious lack of transparency. Apparently, the Brown Act, the state’s open meeting law does not mention minutes. (The Union Democrat, April 13, 2016, by Guy McCarthy)

The Southside School District board of trustees chose a board member to fill an empty seat at a regular board meeting without announcing the item in the meeting’s agenda. Under the Brown Act, public agencies must announce agenda items 72 hours before the meeting. (Hollister Free Lance, April 11, 2016, by Katie Helland)

The Santa Rose City Council is asking their staff to strengthen the proposed sunshine ordinance. They are especially interested in facilitating a more “robust community conversation.” (The Santa Rosa Press Democrat, March 29, 2016, by Kevin McCallum)

Responding to citizen complaints over alleged violations of the Brown Act by the Lindsay City Council, the Tulare County Grand Jury reported that it found evidence of wrong doing: “Some City Council members were involved in discussions over union issues at private residences and outside the parameters of established procedures.” (Valley Voice, March 28, 22016, by Valley Voice Contributor)

In response to the District Attorney’s recommendations, the Garden Grove City Council agreed to record closed-session meetings and save the recordings and to create new positions in open meetings. They deadlocked on allowing an audit of a public safety position done behind closed doors and did not take action on other transparency issues. (The Orange County Register, March 10, 2016, by Chris Haire)