Friday, 22 January 2010 00:58

AWA Discusses Brown Act, 21st Century Communications

Written by 
Rate this item
(0 votes)
slide2-awa_discusses_brown_act_21st_century_communications.pngAmador County – The Amador Water Agency board discussed the Brown Act and e-mails last week, deciding to limit such interaction to setting board meetings. District 5 Director Terence Moore took criticism in December from District 4’s Debbie Dunn, when the board discussed its next vice president. Now Vice President Dunn said an e-mail to board members by Moore was leading and may have included “intent or purpose.” Moore in December said his e-mail simply reminded board members “what I said last year, that District 3 hasn’t been represented in a long time.” Moore said: “I don’t think that’s leading.” A 12-year board member, Moore recalled last year saying that “District 3 has not had a president for years,” and he thought “someone from District 3 needs to be president.” The e-mail noted that administrative appointments were on the agenda. District 3 Director Don Cooper was nominated for the vice presidency but pulled his nomination at that December 10th meeting, and Dunn went on to take the vice presidency. Cooper said he asked for the item on last week’s agenda to clarify “board correspondence and Brown Act compliance.” Cooper said he sought “some clarity in communications,” and wanted to share information but not influence opinion. Dunn said she also requested the Brown Act topic, saying “it jeopardizes all members on the board.” AWA Attorney Stephen Kronick summarized an e-mail he sent to the board explaining the issue. Kronick said serial meetings and communications are not a really clear subject, and the “law changed last year with a court interpretation.” It said politicians “cannot use serial communications to get a collective concurrence of a matter of agency business,” if it is intended to influence opinions. Kronick said the ruling “surprised the Legislature, which turned around and passed a law saying you can’t use serial communications for even discussing agency matters.” He said that included e-mailing or texting. Kronick said they can use e-mail for finding meeting time availability, and there may be other areas, but it cannot be used to determine a “collective concurrence” on board business. He said the board “cannot have serial communications to discuss an item of agency business.” Cooper asked about the propriety of his “write-up of the efficiencies of the pumps” in the Central Amador Water Project, which he sent to Engineering Committee member Bill Condrashoff, but not to Moore. Kronick said it was a “good move.” Cooper said he did send it to Interim General Manger Gene Mancebo, who could send it on to board members. Moore and Condrashoff said they would “cease and desist” all communications, except for meeting arrangements. District 2 Director Gary Thomas said: “I’m really guilty. I have never e-mailed anyone about anything, ever.” Story by Jim Reece This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Read 425 times Last modified on Friday, 22 January 2010 04:56
Tom