City Responds to Citizen Concern
The City provided the following letter to PCA, in answer to Tim Rood’s letter concerning meetings of various Councilmembers on the subject of the unpaid Piedmont Recreational Facilities Organization (PRFO) balance in connection with their Blair Park sports project. (see previous correspondence)
July 5, 2013
Dear Mr.Rood:
The City of Piedmont is in receipt of your letter, dated July1, 2013, alleging that members of the City Council violated the Ralph M. Brown Act by meeting with representatives of the Piedmont Recreational Facilities Organization (“PRFO”). Tim, I fear that you have misconstrued the Brown Act in such a way as to imply that the Act prohibits constituents from discussing issues with their elected officials.
Specifically, your letter states your belief that ”the participation of a majority of the members of the City Council in one or more of the negotiation sessions with PRFO constituted a serial meeting of the City Council that was not properly noticed under the Brown Act.”
The residents of Piedmont have a basic right to meet with their elected officials. This right is in fact so important that Government Code §54952.2(c)(1) specifically exempts contacts or communications between a member of a legislative body and “any other person “from the requirements of the Act. The mere fact that a member of the public ultimately meets with a majority of the members of a legislative body in separate meetings does not in and of itself mean that a “meeting” has occurred within the meaning and regulatory reach of the Brown Act. A meeting, serial or otherwise, occurs only where a quorum of Council has discussed, deliberated or taken action (§54952.2(b)(l)), none of which took place in the meetings between PRFO and the Councilmembers.
For years, the City of Piedmont has endeavored to meet and exceed the requirements of the Brown Act and provide ample public notice to residents. However, the Act has not previously been interpreted to prohibit members of the public from discussing issues with their elected officials. Indeed, Piedmonters opposed to PRFO’s proposed project have also met with Councilmembers and they were fully within their rights to do so.
Sincerely,
Geoffrey Grote, City Administrator
City of Piedmont
Mr. Grote is contending that citizens have a right to meet with their elected representatives and no violation of the Brown Act occurred.
The meetings questioned by Tim Rood are not casual conversations between concerned citizens and elected representatives. They were, in fact, negotiations between the City of Piedmont and the Piedmont Recreational Facilities Organization or PRFO. An agreement exists between the City of Piedmont and PRFO whereby PRFO agreed to reimburse the city for legal and other consulting services paid for by the city as part of the aborted Blair Park sports complex. Geoff Grote, Piedmont City Administrator, places the amount due the city at approximately $220,000.
That $220,000 is taxpayer money that was expended by the City of Piedmont on behalf of the Blair Park sports complex project. A project which the PRFO repeatedly touted as “A Gift to the City.”
At the least, Mr. Grote should have admitted there might be an issue with Brown Act compliance and seek an appropriate remedy.
Jim Semitekol
Mr. Grote states: “For years, the City of Piedmont has endeavored to meet and exceed the requirements of the Brown Act and provide ample public notice to residents.” In contrast to Piedmont, many cities (including Oakland, Berkeley and San Francisco) have enacted local Sunshine Ordinances that provide increased notice to residents – Berkeley uses 11 days instead of 3 – and insures compliance that exceeds the Brown Act. Piedmont uses the Brown Act as a shield rather than as a first step to open government.
One need not look to Berkeley for better “sunshine”, just look to the Piedmont School Board – that board publishes future agenda items and meetings dates well in advance of the 72 hour requirement.