Amador County – The Ione City Council last week directed staff to adhere to long-standing Brown Act requirements despite partial suspension of the act in the 2012 Budget Act.

City Manager Edwin Pattison said the city submits Brown Act related reimbursement costs to the state quarterly and has been reimbursed several thousand dollars over the last two years.

City Attorney James Maynard in an Aug. 3 report said the California Legislature suspended the Brown Act with the passage of Assembly Bill 1464, the Budget Act of 2012.

Maynard said the League of California Cities Brown Act Committee convened to review and discuss the suspension of portions of the Brown Act and recommended that “cities continue to comply with all requirements of the now-suspended provisions of the Brown Act.” Maynard “also reviewed the Budget Act and concur with the Brown Act Committee’s analysis” and recommendation.

Maynard said AB 1464, signed into law on June 27, contains a schedule of state mandates that are suspended during the 2012-2013 budget year. Further, the Brown Act was included in SB 1006, enacted June 27, which extended suspension of the provisions of the Brown Act to last three fiscal years.

The suspension extends to five provisions of the Brown Act, including “Preparation and posting at least 72 hours before a regular meeting of an agenda that contains a brief general description of each item of business to be transacted or discussed at the meeting.”

It also suspends a provision requiring “inclusion of the agenda of a brief general description of all items to be discussed in closed session” and “disclosure of each item to be discussed in closed session in an open meeting, prior to any closed session.”

It also suspended the “report in open session prior to adjournment on the actions and votes taken in closed session regarding certain subject matters,” and the requirement to “provide copies to the public of certain closed session documents.”

Maynard said AB 1464 refers to “two prior decisions of the Commission on State Mandates in which the Commission determined that these requirements of the Brown Act impose reimbursable mandates on local governments. By referencing the Commission’s decisions, the Legislature intended to suspend only the requirements” as mentioned. “The remainder of the Brown Act therefore remains in effect and meetings of local legislative bodies must generally continue to be open and public.”

The Brown Act requirements were suspended in 1990, at which time most cities reported they would continue to comply with all requirements of the Brown Act regardless of the suspension, Maynard said.

“The suspended provisions are central to the Act,” he said, and “noncompliance with those provisions would unquestionably degrade transparency. Further, notwithstanding a lack of legal consequences, noncompliance could provoke a hostile reaction from the public and could suggest, inaccurately, that the City opposes open government.”

Story by Jim Reece.