Write a review of FAC to help us keep our Top Rated Nonprofit status!

Search Results

Clear Results
Category
Topic
Select Year

Showing 21 - 27 of 27 results

  • Asked and Answered

    Brown Act

    Closed sessions…

    The city can likely justify its closed session under Government Code 54956.9, which allows legislative bodies to hold closed sessions to discuss pending litigation when discussion in open session would prejudice the public agency.  The purpose of the pending litigation exemption is to protect confidential attorney-client communications and allow a legislative body to meet […]

    June 14, 2009

  • Asked and Answered

    Brown Act

    When can a public Board claim attorney-client privilege?

    […] pursuant to the attorney-client privilege. the Brown Act permits a closed session for the receipt of advice from an agency attorney, only "regarding pending anticipated or pending litigation" and then only when "discussion in open session concerning those matters would prejudice the position of the local agency in the litigation." Govt. Code section 54956.9. […]

    March 25, 2013

  • Asked and Answered

    Brown Act

    Getting information from closed sessions

    As a preliminary matter, it is not clear why your Board would have cited Government Code section 54956.9.  Section 54956.9 provides for closed sessions to discuss pending litigation, and does not apply to either of the items you listed in your inquiry. With regard to the first item, public employee discipline/dismissal/release, the Brown Act […]

    June 14, 2009

  • Asked and Answered

    Brown Act

    Charter board meetings flout Brown Act rules

    […] may be addressed.Id. The Brown Act authorizes closed sessions to be held under several circumstances: ...to confer with legal counsel to receive advice regarding anticipated or pending litigation (Gov't Code §54956.9); to meet with specific law enforcement officials on matters posing a threat to the security of public buildings, essential public services, or that […]

    June 8, 2011

  • Latest News

    Press Release

    FAC Prevails in Lawsuit Against Bakersfield Over Open Meetings, Records Violations

    […] that city leaders discussed in secret fundamental issues of city governance, including revenue, staffing and taxation. The city defended the closed-door sessions by saying discussions involved anticipated litigation, and therefore were exempt from the Brown Act’s public meeting requirements. Kern County Superior Court Judge Stephen Schuett rejected that argument. "To permit the City Council […]

    January 10, 2020