Join
donate

Search Results for: 54956.8

A&A: Selling property and public input

firstamendment June 13, 2009

Selling property and public input Q: Can a city sell property with just a closed session hearing? No open public hearing on the sale was held. A: Government Code section 54956.8 permits a legislative body to meet in closed session to advise its negotiator concerning the “price” and “terms of payment” in connection with the purchase, sale, lease or exchange of property by or for the agency. A California appellate court stated that the purpose

Read More »

Documents from Closed Session Real Property Negotiations

firstamendment June 14, 2009

Documents from Closed Session Real Property Negotiations Q: My question is in regard to disclosure of information from closed session after a real property negotiation has been completed. Are the documents involved in the transaction able to be public? Is the information our consultant gave us regarding pricing and the appraisal public? Currently our superintendent is trying to say all documents and information given to the school board are confidential because they were given in

Read More »

A&A: Circumstances for closed meetings

FAC June 13, 2009

Circumstances for closed meetings Q: For what reasons can a legislative body have a closed meeting? A: Meetings of any “legislative body” of a “local agency” as those terms are defined in California Government Code sections 54592 and 549451, respectively, may hold closed sessions for the following reasons: —To discuss and decide whether an applicant for a license or license renewal who has a criminal record is sufficiently rehabilitated to obtain the license (Gov’t Code

Read More »

A&A: Notices of City’s Closed Session Real Estate Negotiations Provide Only Generic Information

FAC April 21, 2022

Q: First Question: for Real Estate transactions going to my City Council in a closed session for “price and terms of payment for the purchase, sale, exchange, or lease” all have the same catch-all description “Conference with Real Property Negotiators:1. Property: APN 000-000-000 (the addresses vary)2. Agency Negotiators: xxx, yyy, zzz (the names vary)3. Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payments Is the generic expression “Conference with Real Property Negotiators” too general to be sufficient?

Read More »

A&A: Does Brown Act allow School District, City to negotiate millions in fees in closed session?

FAC November 24, 2015

Q: Our Unified School District has negotiated over $30 million in developer fees since 2005 during closed session that should otherwise be discussed in open session. In reviewing the Brown Act, it appears only property negotiations–such as terms and price for the purchase and sale–are subject to closed session. My question is can the school district keep negotiation of developer fees with a third party home/commercial developer secret behind closed session when such fees are derived on

Read More »

A&A: School Board Closed Sessions with Administrators

firstamendment June 13, 2009

School Board Closed Sessions with Administrators Q: The School Board meets in Closed Session and apparently regularly invites a “leadership team” of administrators into the Closed Session. The administrators are not necessarily there to answer specific questions that are on the agenda of the Closed Session, but to merely be there in case questions come up. I understand that board members who apparently know this to be a possible violation of the Brown Act, both

Read More »

73 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 1 Disclosure Requirements for Closed Sessions on Real Estate Purchases (1990)

firstamendment June 13, 2009

Office of the Attorney General State of California 73 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 1 Opinion No. 89-903 January 9, 1990 THE HONORABLE JAMES P. FOX DISTRICT ATTORNEY COUNTY OF SAN MATEO THE HONORABLE JAMES P. FOX, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, has requested an opinion on the following question: Would the adoption by the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District of a resolution listing all parcels of real property larger than twenty acres within its

Read More »

A&A: Brown Act violations in closed session real-property negotiations

FAC September 8, 2016

Q: The City Council on held a real property negotiation in closed session without meeting the requirement to disclose the party being negotiated with. This has occurred three times before, and was recorded by me on June 1. I want to delay the sale of the properties being negotiated. I need to know how to use the “Cure and Correct” action to cause the Council to have to invalidate the property sale. I am not sure

Read More »

75 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 14 Local Board Can Use Closed Session to Discuss Litigation Settlement (1992)

firstamendment June 13, 2009

Office of the Attorney General State of California 75 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 14 Opinion No. 91-803 February 5, 1992 THE HONORABLE MICHAEL D. BRADBURY DISTRICT ATTORNEY VENTURA COUNTY THE HONORABLE MICHAEL D. BRADBURY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, VENTURA COUNTY, has requested an opinion on the following question May a local agency such as a county board of supervisors use the “pending litigation” exception of the Ralph M. Brown Act to go into closed session to deliberate

Read More »

The Brown Act (text of the law updated 2013)

FAC October 3, 2012

Resources Access to Meetings Text of The Ralph M. Brown Act Government Code Section 54950-54963   (Updated 2013) Visit the California Legislature website for the most current text. Access here. 54950. In enacting this chapter, the Legislature finds and declares that the public commissions, boards and councils and the other public agencies in this State exist to aid in the conduct of the people’s business. It is the intent of the law that their actions be

Read More »

71 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 96 Brown Act Requires Open Meeting of Air Pollution Control District Board (1988)

firstamendment June 13, 2009

Office of the Attorney General State of California 71 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 96 Opinion No. 87-1205 March 24, 1988 THE CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD THE CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD has requested an opinion on the following questions: Does the Ralph M. Brown Act require the deliberations of a hearing board of an air pollution control district, after it has conducted a public hearing on a variance, order of abatement, or permit appeal, to be

Read More »

CA Sunshine Ordinance: Oakland

FAC October 8, 2012

Oakland’s Sunshine Ordinance was adopted in 2003. Chapter 2.20 PUBLIC MEETINGS AND PUBLIC RECORDS Article I In General 2.20.010 Findings and purpose. The Oakland City Council finds and declares: A. A government’s duty is to serve the public and in reaching its decisions to accommodate those who wish to obtain information about or participate in the process. B. Commissions, boards, councils, advisory bodies and other agencies of the city exist to conduct the people’s business.

Read More »

CA Sunshine Ordinance: Milpitas

FAC October 8, 2012

Milpitas adopted their Sunshine Ordinance in 2005 ORDINANCE NO. 262.1 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MILPITAS (1) repealing chapter 310 of the Municipal Code; (2) repealing chapter 320 of the Municipal Code; and (3) adding Chapter 310 to Title I of the Milpitas Municipal Code establishing regulations governing access to public meetings and public records, designating city employee salary information by title as a public record, regulating lobbyists’ activities

Read More »

CA Sunshine Ordinances: San Francisco

FAC October 8, 2012

Provisions of the Sunshine Ordinance – Section 67 Sec. 67.1 Findings And Purpose. The Board of Supervisors and the People of the City and County of San Francisco find and declare: (a) Government’s duty is to serve the public, reaching its decisions in full view of the public. (b) Elected officials, commissions, boards, councils and other agencies of the City and County exist to conduct the people’s business. The people do not cede to these

Read More »