Question
An outside attorney is employed to investigate a city council member. The client is the city council. May the attorney redact information and not provide the client with the entire file?
The outside attorney heavily redacted a report and will not permit members of the city council to review the entire file. The city attorney is party in investigation proceedings regarding harassment by council member. Is not the client entitled to the entire file without redactions? City council members have complained about the heavy redactions.
Does the Brown Act require discussion of this type of thing in closed session? I am unsure if anything applies to investigation on council members and investigation started without notification to council members.
Answer
The Brown Act governs access to meetings and provides exemptions for when meetings may be held in closed session. Unfortunately there is no section of the Brown Act that requires a government body such as the city council to meet for discussion regarding a particular topic.
The Public Record Act governs which government records must be disclosed and which are exempt from disclosure. Ordinarily, documents subject to the attorney-client privilege are exempt from public disclosure. Cal. Ev. Code § 954. The situation you describe is unique in that it seems to involve a situation where an attorney is refusing to disclose documents to the client. Unfortunately, if this is the case, the client, in this case the city council, would have to enforce their rights against their attorney (though matters of attorney-client privilege are beyond the scope of services we are able to provide). You as a third party would not have the ability to obtain these documents under the Public Records Act, as they would likely be exempt, nor would you have standing to bring suit against the attorney for any breach of duty in failing to disclose the results of the investigation.
Bryan Cave LLP is general counsel for the First Amendment Coalition and responds to FAC hotline inquiries. In responding to these inquiries, we can give general information regarding open government and speech issues but cannot provide specific legal advice or representation.
Asked & Answered posts should not be relied on as legal advice, and FAC makes no guarantees about their completeness or accuracy. All posts carry a date of publication that readers should take note of in assessing their usefulness, given that laws and interpretations of them may change over time. Posts predating Jan. 1, 2023, that discuss the California Public Records Act may contain statute numbers no longer in use. Please see this page for a table showing how the California Public Records Act has been renumbered.