HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/24/2011
City Council Members:
Rhonda Smiley, Assistant to the City Manager Sue Benham, Chair
Jacquie Sullivan
Rudy Salas
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
Regular Meeting of the
LEGISLATIVE AND LITIGATION COMMITTEE
Monday, October 24, 2011 - 12:00 p.m.
City Hall North
First Floor – Conference Room A
1600 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA 93301
The meeting was called to order at 12:00 PM.
1. ROLL CALL
Present: Councilmember Sue Benham, Chair
Councilmember Jacquie Sullivan
Councilmember Rudy Salas
Staff Present:
Rhonda Smiley, Asst. to the City Manager Ginny Gennaro, City Attorney
Chris Huot, Administrative Analyst Jessalee Talley, Associate Attorney
Roberta Gafford, City Clerk Andrew Heglund, Associate Attorney
Nelson Smith, Finance Director Greg Williamson, Chief of Police
2. ADOPT JUNE 20, 2011 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
Adopted as submitted
3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS
None
Legislative and Litigation Committee
Agenda Summary Report
October 24, 2011
Page 2
4. NEW BUSINESS
A. Discussion Regarding Possible Adoption of a Council Policy Governing Electronic
Communication during Public Meetings – Gennaro
City Attorney Ginny Gennaro stated Mayor Hall requested staff prepare information
regarding the usage of electronic devices, such as cell phones, smart phones, laptops,
and ipads, during Council and Committee meetings, including functions such as
texting, instant messaging, tweeting, and e-mailing. This policy pertains to using
electronic devices and their functions to communicate with colleagues, individuals at
any public meeting, and with individuals not present at the meeting. Public officials
using electronic devices, including those previously mentioned, to discuss a topic
related to Government business during a public meeting, may be in violation of the
Brown Act, which states public business needs to be conducted in public. Such use
may expose the City to potential litigation. This includes devices paid for personally by
the public official and any device provided by the city or government agency to the
public official.
City Attorney Gennaro provided the following three hypothetical examples:
1) A Councilmember uses an electronic device to communicate with another
Councilmember while sitting at the dais, with the public unaware. This could result
in formulating an opinion among the majority of the Council without the public
knowing about it and would be in violation of the Brown Act.
2) Any communication through electronic devices regarding an item not posted on
an agenda 72 hours prior to a public meeting violates the Brown Act, because
others cannot participate, hear, or see members of the Legislative Body doing so.
3) Communication through electronic devices during a Public Hearing violates the
requesting party’s due process rights, as members of the Government body can
appear distracted and, could be receiving influential information not available at
the meeting from colleagues, individuals at the meeting, or others not present at
the meeting. Such actions could render the government body’s final decision
invalid.
City Attorney Gennaro stated several cities in the State of California, including the
City of Huntington Beach, San Jose, Gilroy, Saratoga, and Portola Valley have
created electronic communication policies, all of which were all reviewed by staff.
She also stated that staff has compiled a draft policy for the Committee’s
consideration.
Committee Chair Sue Benham thanked staff for the presentation and thorough work
on creating a very simple and straightforward policy.
Committee member Jacquie Sullivan agreed with Committee Chair Benham.
Committee member Rudy Salas asked if Policy #1 of the proposed Council policy
prohibited electronic communication between Councilmembers and members of
the public regarding any item on a public agenda.
Legislative and Litigation Committee
Agenda Summary Report
October 24, 2011
Page 3
City Attorney Gennaro clarified that the policy would prohibit the use of all electronic
communication during a public meeting. In case of an emergency during a public
meeting, the Councilmember would excuse him or herself from the dais to the lobby
to address the emergency. During a public hearing, Council would need to adjourn
the hearing.
Committee member Salas asked if this would require the electronic device be turned
off all together.
City Attorney Gennaro stated that, depending on the policy, the electronic device
can be turned to silent and, in an event of an emergency, the individual would
excuse themselves from the dais.
Committee member Salas asked if the policy would also prohibit electronic devices
used to take notes to refer to later or to review previous conversations regarding a
certain item.
City Attorney Gennaro stated the current draft policy would prohibit this kind of
action, unless the individual would provide a copy of what he or she may be
reviewing to the Clerk for public access to such information. In the event of records
request for such information, the individual would need to provide it. If that individual
refused or didn’t have the information to provide, the City would be liable for the
violation, not the individual.
Committee member Salas also asked if tweets or e-mails are received during a public
meeting, if it would it be necessary to print and provide them to the Clerk for retention,
as well.
City Attorney Gennaro stated that with the current draft policy, such a situation would
not happen, because all electronic devices would be turned off. However, in a
hypothetical situation, the person receiving an e-mail or tweet, would need to
interrupt the conversation taking place and disclose they have received such an item
and then print and provide it to the Clerk.
Committee member Jacquie Sullivan made a motion to have the full Council review
the draft policy governing electronic communication during public meetings for
consideration. The motion was unanimously approved.
5. COMMITTEE COMMENTS
None
6. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 12:24
cc: Honorable Mayor and City Council