44 OPEN & PUBLIC V: A GUIDE TO THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT
CHAPTER 5: CLOSED SESSIONS
The California Attorney General has opined that if the agency’s attorney is not a participant, a litigation closed session cannot be held.17 In any event, local agency officials should always consult the agency’s attorney before placing this type of closed session on the agenda in order to be certain that it is being done properly.
Before holding a closed session under the pending litigation exception, the legislative body must publicly state the basis for the closed session by identifying one of the following three types of matters: existing litigation, anticipated exposure to litigation, or anticipated initiation of litigation.18 Existing litigation
Q. May the legislative body agree to settle a lawsuit in a properly-noticed closed session, without placing the settlement agreement on an open session agenda for public approval? A. Yes, but the settlement agreement is a public document and must be disclosed on request. Furthermore, a settlement agreement cannot commit the agency to matters that are required to have public hearings.
Existing litigation includes any adjudicatory proceedings before a court, administrative body exercising its adjudicatory authority, hearing officer, or arbitrator. The clearest situation in which a closed session is authorized is when the local agency meets with its legal counsel to discuss a pending matter that has been filed in a court or with an administrative agency and names the local agency as a party. The legislative body may meet under these circumstances to receive updates on the case from attorneys, participate in developing strategy as the case develops, or consider alternatives for resolution of the case. Generally, an agreement to settle litigation may be approved in closed session. However, an agreement to settle litigation cannot be approved in closed session if it commits the city to take an action that is required to have a public hearing.19
Anticipated exposure to litigation against the
local agency
Closed sessions are authorized for legal counsel to inform the legislative body of a significant exposure to litigation against the local agency, but only if based on “existing facts and circumstances” as defined by the Brown Act.20 The legislative body may also meet under this exception to determine whether a closed session is authorized based on information provided by legal counsel or staff. In general, the “existing facts and circumstances” must be publicly disclosed unless they are privileged written communications or not yet known to a potential plaintiff.
Anticipated initiation of litigation by the local agency A closed session may be held under the exception for the anticipated initiation of litigation when the legislative body seeks legal advice on whether to protect the agency’s rights and interests by initiating litigation.
Certain actions must be reported in open session at the same meeting following the closed January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
OPEN & PUBLIC V: A GUIDE TO THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT 45
session. Other actions, as where final approval rests with another party or the court, may be announced when they become final and upon inquiry of any person.21 Each agency attorney should be aware of and make the disclosures that are required by the particular circumstances.
Real estate negotiations
A legislative body may meet in closed session with its negotiator to discuss the purchase, sale, exchange, or lease of real property by or for the local agency. A “lease” includes a lease renewal or renegotiation. The purpose is to grant authority to the legislative body’s negotiator on price and terms of payment.22 Caution should be exercised to limit discussion to price and terms of payment without straying to other related issues such as site design, architecture, or other aspects of the project for which the transaction is contemplated.23
Q. May other terms of a real estate transaction, aside from price and terms of payment, be addressed in closed session?
A. No. However, there are differing opinions over the scope of the phrase “price and terms of payment” in connection with real estate closed sessions. Many agency attorneys argue that any term that directly affects the economic value of the transaction falls within the ambit of “price and terms of payment.” Others take a narrower, more literal view of the phrase.
The agency’s negotiator may be a member of the legislative body itself. Prior to the closed session, or on the agenda, the legislative body must identify its negotiators, the real property that the negotiations may concern24 and the names of the parties with whom its negotiator may negotiate.25 After real estate negotiations are concluded, the approval and substance of the agreement must be publicly reported. If its own approval makes the agreement final, the body must report in open session at the public meeting during which the closed session is held. If final approval rests with another party, the local agency must report the approval and the substance of the agreement upon inquiry by any person, as soon as the agency is informed of it.26 “Our population is exploding, and we have to think about new school sites,” said Board Member Jefferson.
“Not only that,” interjected Board Member Tanaka, “we need to get rid of a couple of our older facilities.”
“Well, obviously the place to do that is in a closed session,” said Board Member O’Reilly. “Otherwise we’re going to set off land speculation. And if we even mention closing a school, parents are going to be in an uproar.” A closed session to discuss potential sites is not authorized by the Brown Act. The exception is limited to meeting with its negotiator over specific sites — which must be identified at an open and public meeting.
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
46 OPEN & PUBLIC V: A GUIDE TO THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT
CHAPTER 5: CLOSED SESSIONS
Public employment
The Brown Act authorizes a closed session “to consider the appointment, employment, evaluation of performance, discipline, or dismissal of a public employee or to hear complaints or charges brought against the employee.”27 The purpose of this exception — commonly referred to as the “personnel exception” — is to avoid undue publicity or embarrassment for an employee or applicant for employment and to allow full and candid discussion by the legislative body; thus, it is restricted to discussing individuals, not general personnel policies.28 The body must possess the power to appoint, evaluate, or dismiss the employee to hold a closed session under this exception.29 That authority may be delegated to a subsidiary appointed body.30 An employee must be given at least 24 hours notice of any closed session convened to hear specific complaints or charges against him or her. This occurs when the legislative body is reviewing evidence, which could include live testimony, and adjudicating conflicting testimony offered as evidence. A legislative body may examine (or exclude) witnesses,31 and the California Attorney General has opined that, when an affected employee and advocate have an official or essential role to play, they may be permitted to participate in the closed session.32 The employee has the right to have the specific complaints and charges discussed in a public session rather than closed session.33 If the employee is not given the 24-hour prior notice, any disciplinary action is null and void.34
However, an employee is not entitled to notice and a hearing where the purpose of the closed session is to consider a performance evaluation. The Attorney General and the courts have determined that personnel performance evaluations do not constitute complaints and charges, which are more akin to accusations made against a person.35 Q. Must 24 hours notice be given to an employee whose negative performance evaluation is to be considered by the legislative body in closed session? A. No, the notice is reserved for situations where the body is to hear complaints and charges from witnesses.
Correct labeling of the closed session on the agenda is critical. A closed session agenda that identified discussion of an employment contract was not sufficient to allow dismissal of an employee.36 An incorrect agenda description can result in invalidation of an action and much embarrassment.
For purposes of the personnel exception, “employee” specifically includes an officer or an independent contractor who functions as an officer or an employee. Examples of the former include a city manager, district general manager or superintendent. Examples of the latter Include a legal counsel or engineer hired on contract to act as local agency attorney or chief engineer.
Elected officials, appointees to the governing body or subsidiary bodies, and independent contractors other than those discussed above are not employees for purposes of the personnel exception.37 Action on individuals who are not “employees” must also be public — including discussing and voting on appointees to committees, or debating the merits of independent contractors, or considering a complaint against a member of the legislative body itself.
PRACTICE TIP: Discussions of
who to appoint to an advisory
body and whether or not to
censure a fellow member of
the legislative body must be
held in the open.
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
OPEN & PUBLIC V: A GUIDE TO THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT 47
The personnel exception specifically prohibits discussion or action on proposed compensation in closed session, except for a disciplinary reduction in pay. Among other things, that means there can be no personnel closed sessions on a salary change (other than a disciplinary reduction) between any unrepresented individual and the legislative body. However, a legislative body may address the compensation of an unrepresented individual, such as a city manager, in a closed session as part of a labor negotiation (discussed later in this chapter), yet another example of the importance of using correct agenda descriptions.
Reclassification of a job must be public, but an employee’s ability to fill that job may be considered in closed session.
Any closed session action to appoint, employ, dismiss, accept the resignation of, or otherwise affect the employment status of a public employee must be reported at the public meeting during which the closed session is held. That report must identify the title of the position, but not the names of all persons considered for an employment position.38 However, a report on a dismissal or non-renewal of an employment contract must be deferred until administrative remedies, if any, are exhausted.39
“I have some important news to announce,” said Mayor Garcia. “We’ve decided to terminate the contract of the city manager, effective immediately.
The council has met in closed session and we’ve negotiated six months severance pay.”
“Unfortunately, that has some serious budget consequences, so we’ve had to delay phase two of the East Area Project.”
This may be an improper use of the personnel closed session if the council agenda described the item as the city manager’s evaluation. In addition, other than labor negotiations, any action on individual compensation must be taken in open session.
Caution should be exercised to not discuss in closed session issues, such as budget impacts in this hypothetical, beyond the scope of the posted closed session notice.
Labor negotiations
The Brown Act allows closed sessions for some aspects of labor negotiations. Different provisions (discussed below) apply to school and community college districts.
A legislative body may meet in closed session to instruct its bargaining representatives, which may be one or more of its members,40 on employee salaries and fringe benefits for both represented (“union”) and non-represented employees. For represented employees, it may also consider working conditions that by law require negotiation. For the purpose of labor negotiation closed sessions, an “employee” includes an officer or an independent contractor who functions as an officer or an employee, but independent contractors who do not serve in the capacity of an officer or employee are not covered by this closed session exception.41 These closed sessions may take place before or during negotiations with employee representatives. Prior to the closed session, the legislative body must hold an open and public session in which it identifies its designated representatives.
PRACTICE TIP: The personnel
exception specifically prohibits
discussion or action on
proposed compensation in
closed session except for a
disciplinary reduction in pay.
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
48 OPEN & PUBLIC V: A GUIDE TO THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT
CHAPTER 5: CLOSED SESSIONS
During its discussions with representatives on salaries and fringe benefits, the legislative body may also discuss available funds and funding priorities, but only to instruct its representative. The body may also meet in closed session with a conciliator who has intervened in negotiations. 42 The approval of an agreement concluding labor negotiations with represented employees must be reported after the agreement is final and has been accepted or ratified by the other party. The report must identify the item approved and the other party or parties to the negotiation.43 The labor closed sessions specifically cannot include final action on proposed compensation of one or more unrepresented employees.
Labor negotiations — school and community college districts Employee relations for school districts and community college districts are governed by the Rodda Act, where different meeting and special notice provisions apply. The entire board, for example, may negotiate in closed sessions.
Four types of meetings are exempted from compliance with the Rodda Act:
1. A negotiating session with a recognized or certified employee organization;
2. A meeting of a mediator with either side;
3. A hearing or meeting held by a fact finder or arbitrator; and
4. A session between the board and its bargaining agent, or the board alone, to discuss its position regarding employee working conditions and instruct its agent.44 Public participation under the Rodda Act also takes another form.45 All initial proposals of both sides must be presented at public meetings and are public records. The public must be given reasonable time to inform itself and to express its views before the district may adopt its initial proposal. In addition, new topics of negotiations must be made public within 24 hours. Any votes on such a topic must be followed within 24 hours by public disclosure of the vote of each member.46 The final vote must be in public.
Other Education Code exceptions
The Education Code governs student disciplinary meetings by boards of school districts and community college districts. District boards may hold a closed session to consider the suspension or discipline of a student, if a public hearing would reveal personal, disciplinary, or academic information about the student contrary to state and federal pupil privacy law. The student’s parent or guardian may request an open meeting.47
Community college districts may also hold closed sessions to discuss some student disciplinary matters, awarding of honorary degrees, or gifts from donors who prefer to remain anonymous.48 Kindergarten through 12th grade districts may also meet in closed session to review the contents of the statewide assessment instrument.49
Joint Powers Authorities
The legislative body of a joint powers authority may adopt a policy regarding limitations on disclosure of confidential information obtained in closed session, and may meet in closed session to discuss information that is subject to the policy.50 PRACTICE TIP: Prior to the
closed session, the legislative
body must hold an open
and public session in which
it identifies its designated
representatives.
PRACTICE TIP: Attendance
by the entire legislative body
before a grand jury would not
constitute a closed session
meeting under the Brown Act.
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
OPEN & PUBLIC V: A GUIDE TO THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT 49
License applicants with criminal records
A closed session is permitted when an applicant, who has a criminal record, applies for a license or license renewal and the legislative body wishes to discuss whether the applicant is sufficiently rehabilitated to receive the license. The applicant and the applicant’s attorney are authorized to attend the closed session meeting. If the body decides to deny the license, the applicant may withdraw the application. If the applicant does not withdraw, the body must deny the license in public, immediately or at its next meeting. No information from the closed session can be revealed without consent of the applicant, unless the applicant takes action to challenge the denial.51 Public security
Legislative bodies may meet in closed session to discuss matters posing a threat to the security of public buildings, essential public services, including water, sewer, gas, or electric service, or to the public’s right of access to public services or facilities over which the legislative body has jurisdiction. Closed session meetings for these purposes must be held with designated security or law enforcement officials including the Governor, Attorney General, district attorney, agency attorney, sheriff or chief of police, or their deputies or agency security consultant or security operations manager.52 Action taken in closed session with respect to such public security issues is not reportable action.
Multijurisdictional law enforcement agency
A joint powers agency formed to provide law enforcement services (involving drugs; gangs; sex crimes; firearms trafficking; felony possession of a firearm; high technology, computer, or identity theft; human trafficking; or vehicle theft) to multiple jurisdictions may hold closed sessions to discuss case records of an on-going criminal investigation, to hear testimony from persons involved in the investigation, and to discuss courses of action in particular cases.53 The exception applies to the legislative body of the joint powers agency and to any body advisory to it. The purpose is to prevent impairment of investigations, to protect witnesses and informants, and to permit discussion of effective courses of action.54 Hospital peer review and trade secrets
Two specific kinds of closed sessions are allowed for district hospitals and municipal hospitals, under other provisions of law.55
1. A meeting to hear reports of hospital medical audit or quality assurance committees, or for related deliberations. However, an applicant or medical staff member whose staff privileges are the direct subject of a hearing may request a public hearing.
2. A meeting to discuss “reports involving trade secrets” — provided no action is taken.
A “trade secret” is defined as information which is not generally known to the public or competitors and which: 1) “derives independent economic value, actual or potential” by virtue of its restricted knowledge; 2) is necessary to initiate a new hospital service or program or facility; and 3) would, if prematurely disclosed, create a substantial probability of depriving the hospital of a substantial economic benefit.
The provision prohibits use of closed sessions to discuss transitions in ownership or management, or the district’s dissolution.56
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
50 OPEN & PUBLIC V: A GUIDE TO THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT
CHAPTER 5: CLOSED SESSIONS
Other legislative bases for closed session
Since any closed session meeting of a legislative body must be authorized by the Legislature, it is important to carefully review the Brown Act to determine if there is a provision that authorizes a closed session for a particular subject matter. There are some less frequently encountered topics that are authorized to be discussed by a legislative body in closed session under the Brown Act, including: a response to a confidential final draft audit report from the Bureau of State Audits,57 consideration of the purchase or sale of particular pension fund investments by a legislative body of a local agency that invests pension funds,58 hearing a charge or complaint from a member enrolled in a health plan by a legislative body of a local agency that provides Medi-Cal services,59 discussions by a county board of supervisors that governs a health plan licensed pursuant to the Knox-Keene Health Care Services Plan Act related to trade secrets or contract negotiations concerning rates of payment,60 and discussions by an insurance pooling joint powers agency related to a claim filed against, or liability of, the agency or a member of the agency.61 Who may attend closed sessions
Meetings of a legislative body are either fully open or fully closed; there is nothing in between.
Therefore, local agency officials and employees must pay particular attention to the authorized attendees for the particular type of closed session. As summarized above, the authorized attendees may differ based on the topic of the closed session. Closed sessions may involve only the members of the legislative body and only agency counsel, management and support staff, and consultants necessary for consideration of the matter that is the subject of closed session, with very limited exceptions for adversaries or witnesses with official roles in particular types of hearings (e.g., personnel disciplinary hearings and license hearings). In any case, individuals who do not have an official role in the closed session subject matters must be excluded from closed sessions.63
Q. May the lawyer for someone suing the agency attend a closed session in order to explain to the legislative body why it should accept a settlement offer? A. No, attendance in closed sessions is reserved exclusively for the agency’s advisors.
The confidentiality of closed session discussions
The Brown Act explicitly prohibits the unauthorized disclosure of confidential information acquired in a closed session by any person present, and offers various remedies to address breaches of confidentiality.64 It is incumbent upon all those attending lawful closed sessions to protect the confidentiality of those discussions. One court has held that members of a legislative body cannot be compelled to divulge the content of closed session discussions through the discovery process.65 Only the legislative body acting as a body may agree to divulge confidential closed session information; regarding attorney/client privileged communications, the entire body is the holder of the privilege and only the entire body can decide to waive the privilege.66 PRACTICE TIP: Meetings are
either open or closed. There is
nothing “in between.”62
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
OPEN & PUBLIC V: A GUIDE TO THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT 51
Before adoption of the Brown Act provision specifically prohibiting disclosure of closed session communications, agency attorneys and the Attorney General long opined that officials have a fiduciary duty to protect the confidentiality of closed session discussions. The Attorney General issued an opinion that it is “improper” for officials to disclose information received during a closed session regarding pending litigation,67 though the Attorney General has also concluded that a local agency is preempted from adopting an ordinance criminalizing public disclosure of closed session discussions.68 In any event, in 2002, the Brown Act was amended to prescribe particular remedies for breaches of confidentiality. These remedies include injunctive relief; and, if the breach is a willful disclosure of confidential information, the remedies include disciplinary action against an employee, and referral of a member of the legislative body to the grand jury.69 The duty of maintaining confidentiality, of course, must give way to the responsibility to disclose improper matters or discussions that may come up in closed sessions. In recognition of this public policy, under the Brown Act, a local agency may not penalize a disclosure of information learned during a closed session if the disclosure: 1) is made in confidence to the district attorney or the grand jury due to a perceived violation of law; 2) is an expression of opinion concerning the propriety or legality of actions taken in closed session, including disclosure of the nature and extent of the illegal action; or 3) is information that is not confidential.70 The interplay between these possible sanctions and an official’s first amendment rights is complex and beyond the scope of this guide. Suffice it to say that this is a matter of great sensitivity and controversy.
“I want the press to know that I voted in closed session against filing the eminent domain action,” said Council Member Chang.
“Don’t settle too soon,” reveals Council Member Watson to the property owner, over coffee. “The city’s offer coming your way is not our bottom line.” The first comment to the press may be appropriate if it is a part of an action taken by the City Council in closed session that must be reported publicly.71 The second comment to the property owner is not — disclosure of confidential information acquired in closed session is expressly prohibited and harmful to the agency.
PRACTICE TIP: There is a
strong interest in protecting the
confidentiality of proper and
lawful closed sessions.
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
52 OPEN & PUBLIC V: A GUIDE TO THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT
CHAPTER 5: CLOSED SESSIONS
ENDNOTES:
1 California Government Code section 54962
2 California Constitution, Art. 1, section 3
3 61 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 220 (1978); but see California Government Code section 54957.8 (multijurisdictional law enforcement agencies are authorized to meet in closed session to discuss the case records of ongoing criminal investigations, and other related matters). 4 California Government Code section 54957.1
5 California Government Code section 54954.5
6 California Government Code section 54954.2
7 California Government Code section 54954.5
8 California Government Code sections 54956.9 and 54957.7 9 California Government Code section 54957.1(a)
10 California Government Code section 54957.1(b)
11 California Government Code section 54957.2
12 Hamilton v. Town of Los Gatos (1989) 213 Cal.App.3d 1050; 2 Cal.Code Regs. section 18707 13 Roberts v. City of Palmdale (1993) 5 Cal.4th 363
14 California Government Code section 54956.9; Shapiro v. Board of Directors of Center City Development Corp. (2005) 134 Cal.App.4th 170 (agency must be a party to the litigation). 15 82 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 29 (1999)
16 Page v. Miracosta Community College District (2009) 180 Cal.App.4th 471 17 “The Brown Act,” California Attorney General (2003), p. 40 18 California Government Code section 54956.9(g)
19 Trancas Property Owners Association v. City of Malibu (2006) 138 Cal.App.4th 172 20 Government Code section 54956.9(e)
21 California Government Code section 54957.1
22 California Government Code section 54956.8
23 Shapiro v. San Diego City Council (2002) 96 Cal.App.4th 904; see also 93 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 51 (2010) (redevelopment agency may not convene a closed session to discuss rehabilitation loan for a property already subleased to a loan recipient, even if the loan Incorporates some of the sublease terms and includes an operating covenant governing the property); 94 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 82 (2011) (real estate closed session may address form, manner and timing of consideration and other items that cannot be disclosed without revealing price and terms).
24 73 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 1 (1990)
25 California Government Code sections 54956.8 and 54954.5(b) 26 California Government Code section 54957.1(a)(1)
27 California Government Code section 54957(b)
28 63 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 153 (1980); but see Duvall v. Board of Trustees (2000) 93 Cal.App.4th 902 (board may discuss personnel evaluation criteria, process and other preliminary matters in closed session but only if related to the evaluation of a particular employee). 29 Gillespie v. San Francisco Public Library Commission (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 1165; 85 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 77 (2002)
30 Gillespie v. San Francisco Public Library Commission (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 1165; 80 Ops.Cal.Atty.
Gen. 308 (1997). Interviews of candidates to fill a vacant staff position conducted by a temporary committee appointed by the governing body may be done in closed session.
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
OPEN & PUBLIC V: A GUIDE TO THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT 53
31 California Government Code section 54957(b)(3)
32 88 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 16 (2005)
33 Morrison v. Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles (2003) 107 Cal.App.4th 860 34 California Government Code section 54957(b); but see Bollinger v. San Diego Civil Service Commission (1999) 71 Cal.App.4th 568 (notice not required for closed session deliberations regarding complaints or charges, when there was a public evidentiary hearing prior to closed session). 35 78 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 218 (1995); Bell v. Vista Unified School District (2000) 82 Cal.App.4th 672; Furtado v. Sierra Community College (1998) 68 Cal.App.4th 876; Fischer v. Los Angeles Unified School District (1999) 70 Cal.App.4th 87
36 Moreno v. City of King (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 17
37 California Government Code section 54957
38 Gillespie v. San Francisco Public Library Commission (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 1165 39 California Government Code section 54957.1(a)(5)
40 California Government Code section 54957.6
41 California Government Code section 54957.6(b); see also 98 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 41 (2015) (a project labor agreement between a community college district and workers hired by contractors or subcontractors is not a proper subject of closed session for labor negotiations because the workers are not “employees” of the district).
42 California Government Code section 54957.6; and 51 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 201 (1968) 43 California Government Code section 54957.1(a)(6)
44 California Government Code section 3549.1
45 California Government Code section 3540
46 California Government Code section 3547
47 California Education Code section 48918; but see Rim of the World Unified School District v. Superior Court (2003) 104 Cal.App.4th 1393 (Section 48918 preempted by the Federal Family Educational Right and Privacy Act in regard to expulsion proceedings). 48 California Education Code section 72122
49 California Education Code section 60617
50 California Government Code section 54956.96
51 California Government Code section 54956.7
52 California Government Code section 54957
53 McKee v. Los Angeles Interagency Metropolitan Police Apprehension Crime Task Force (2005) 134 Cal.
App.4th 354
54 California Government Code section 54957.8
55 California Government Code section 54962
56 California Health and Safety Code section 32106
57 California Government Code section 54956.75
58 California Government Code section 54956.81
59 California Government Code section 54956.86
60 California Government Code section 54956.87
61 California Government Code section 54956.95
62 46 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 34 (1965)
63 82 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 29 (1999)
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
54 OPEN & PUBLIC V: A GUIDE TO THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT
CHAPTER 5: CLOSED SESSIONS
64 Government Code section 54963
65 Kleitman v. Superior Court (1999) 74 Cal.App.4th 324, 327; see also California Government Code section 54963.
66 Roberts v. City of Palmdale (1993) 5 Cal.4th 363
67 80 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 231 (1997)
68 76 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 289 (1993)
69 California Government Code section 54963
70 California Government Code section 54963
71 California Government Code section 54957.1
Updates to this publication responding to changes in the Brown Act or new court interpretations are available at www.cacities.org/opengovernment. A current version of the Brown Act may be found at www.leginfo.ca.gov.
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
OPEN & PUBLIC V: A GUIDE TO THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT OPEN & PUBLIC V: A GUIDE TO THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT55 55 Chapter 6
REMEDIES
Invalidation........................................................................................................................ 56 Applicability to Past Actions ............................................................................................. 57 Civil action to prevent future violations ........................................................................... 57 Costs and attorney’s fees ................................................................................................. 58 Criminal complaints .......................................................................................................... 58 Voluntary resolution.......................................................................................................... 59 January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
56 OPEN & PUBLIC V: A GUIDE TO THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT
CHAPTER 6: REMEDIES
Certain violations of the Brown Act are designated as misdemeanors, although by far the most commonly used enforcement provisions are those that authorize civil actions to invalidate specified actions taken in violation of the Brown Act and to stop or prevent future violations. Still, despite all the safeguards and remedies to enforce them, it is ultimately impossible for the public to monitor every aspect of public officials’ interactions. Compliance ultimately results from regular training and a good measure of self-regulation on the part of public officials. This chapter discusses the remedies available to the public when that self-regulation is ineffective.
Invalidation
Any interested person, including the district attorney, may seek to invalidate certain actions of a legislative body on the ground that they violate the Brown Act.1 Violations of the Brown Act, however, cannot be invalidated if they involve the following types of actions:
Those taken in substantial compliance with the law. No Brown Act violation is found when the given notice substantially complies with the Brown Act, even when the notice erroneously cites to the wrong Brown Act section, but adequately advises the public that the Board will meet with legal counsel to discuss potential litigation in closed session;2 Those involving the sale or issuance of notes, bonds or other indebtedness, or any related contracts or agreements;
Those creating a contractual obligation, including a contract awarded by competitive bid for other than compensation for professional services, upon which a party has in good faith relied to its detriment;
Those connected with the collection of any tax; or
Those in which the complaining party had actual notice at least 72 hours prior to the regular meeting or 24 hours prior to the special meeting, as the case may be, at which the action is taken.
Before filing a court action seeking invalidation, a person who believes that a violation has occurred must send a written “cure or correct” demand to the legislative body. This demand must clearly describe the challenged action and the nature of the claimed violation. This demand must be sent within 90 days of the alleged violation or 30 days if the action was taken in open session but in violation of Section 54954.2, which requires (subject to specific exceptions) that only properly agendized items are acted on by the governing body during a meeting.3 The legislative
body then has up to 30 days to cure and correct its action. If it does not act, any lawsuit must be filed within the next 15 days. The purpose of this requirement is to offer the body an opportunity to consider whether a violation has occurred and to weigh its options before litigation is filed.
Chapter 6
REMEDIES
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
OPEN & PUBLIC V: A GUIDE TO THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT 57
Although just about anyone has standing to bring an action for invalidation,4 the challenger must show prejudice as a result of the alleged violation.5
An action to invalidate fails to state a cause of
action against the agency if the body deliberated but did not take an action.6 Applicability to Past Actions
Any interested person, including the district attorney, may file a civil action to determine whether past actions of a legislative body occurring on or after January 1, 2013 constitute violations of the Brown Act and are subject to a mandamus, injunction, or declaratory relief action.7 Before filing
an action, the interested person must, within nine months of the alleged violation of the Brown Act, submit a “cease and desist” letter to the legislative body, clearly describing the past action and the nature of the alleged violation.8
The legislative body has 30 days after receipt of the letter to provide an unconditional commitment to cease and desist from the past action.9 If the body
fails to take any action within the 30-day period or takes an action other than an unconditional commitment, a lawsuit may be filed within 60 days.10
The legislative body’s unconditional commitment must be approved at a regular or special meeting as a separate item of business and not on the consent calendar.11 The unconditional commitment must be substantially in the form set forth in the Brown Act.12 No legal action may thereafter be commenced regarding the past action.13 However, an action of the legislative body in violation of its unconditional commitment constitutes an independent violation of the Brown Act and a legal action consequently may be commenced without following the procedural requirements for challenging past actions.14
The legislative body may rescind its prior unconditional commitment by a majority vote of its membership at a regular meeting as a separate item of business not on the consent calendar. At least 30 days written notice of the intended rescission must be given to each person to whom the unconditional commitment was made and to the district attorney. Upon rescission, any interested person may commence a legal action regarding the past actions without following the procedural requirements for challenging past actions.15
Civil action to prevent future violations
The district attorney or any interested person can file a civil action asking the court to:
Stop or prevent violations or threatened violations of the Brown Act by members of the legislative body of a local agency;
Determine the applicability of the Brown Act to actions or threatened future action of the legislative body;
Determine whether any rule or action by the legislative body to penalize or otherwise discourage the expression of one or more of its members is valid under state or federal law; or
Compel the legislative body to tape record its closed sessions.
PRACTICE TIP: A lawsuit to
invalidate must be preceded by
a demand to cure and correct
the challenged action in order
to give the legislative body
an opportunity to consider its
options. The Brown Act does not
specify how to cure or correct
a violation; the best method
is to rescind the action being
complained of and start over, or
reaffirm the action if the local
agency relied on the action and
rescinding the action would
prejudice the local agency.
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
58 OPEN & PUBLIC V: A GUIDE TO THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT
CHAPTER 6: REMEDIES
It is not necessary for a challenger to prove a past pattern or practice of violations by the local agency in order to obtain injunctive relief. A court may presume when issuing an injunction that a single violation will continue in the future where the public agency refuses to admit to the alleged violation or to renounce or curtail the practice.16 Note, however, that a court may not compel elected officials to disclose their recollections of what transpired in a closed session.17 Upon finding a violation of the Brown Act pertaining to closed sessions, a court may compel the legislative body to tape record its future closed sessions. In a subsequent lawsuit to enforce the Brown Act alleging a violation occurring in closed session, a court may upon motion of the plaintiff review the tapes if there is good cause to think the Brown Act has been violated, and make public the relevant portion of the closed session recording.
Costs and attorney’s fees
Someone who successfully invalidates an action taken in violation of the Brown Act or who successfully enforces one of the Brown Act’s civil remedies may seek court costs and reasonable attorney’s fees. Courts have held that attorney’s fees must be awarded to a successful plaintiff unless special circumstances exist that would make a fee award against the public agency unjust.18 When evaluating how to respond to assertions that the Brown Act has been violated, elected officials and their lawyers should assume that attorney’s fees will be awarded against the agency if a violation of the Act is proven.
An attorney’s fee award may only be directed against the local agency and not the individual members of the legislative body. If the local agency prevails, it may be awarded court costs and attorney’s fees if the court finds the lawsuit was clearly frivolous and lacking in merit.19 Criminal complaints
A violation of the Brown Act by a member of the legislative body who acts with the improper intent described below is punishable as a misdemeanor.20 A criminal violation has two components. The first is that there must be an overt act — a member of a legislative body must attend a meeting at which action is taken in violation of the Brown Act.21 “Action taken” is not only an actual vote, but also a collective decision, commitment or promise by a majority of the legislative body to make a positive or negative decision.22 If the meeting involves mere deliberation without the taking of action, there can be no misdemeanor penalty.
A violation occurs for a tentative as well as final decision.23 In fact, criminal liability is triggered by a member’s participation in a meeting in violation of the Brown Act — not whether that member has voted with the majority or minority, or has voted at all.
The second component of a criminal violation is that action is taken with the intent of a member “to deprive the public of information to which the member knows or has reason to know the public is entitled” by the Brown Act.24
PRACTICE TIP: Attorney’s
fees will likely be awarded if
a violation of the Brown Act is
proven.
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
OPEN & PUBLIC V: A GUIDE TO THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT 59
As with other misdemeanors, the filing of a complaint is up to the district attorney. Although criminal prosecutions of the Brown Act are uncommon, district attorneys in some counties aggressively monitor public agencies’ adherence to the requirements of the law.
Some attorneys and district attorneys take the position that a Brown Act violation may be pursued criminally under Government Code section 1222.25 There is no case law to support this view; if anything, the existence of an express criminal remedy within the Brown Act would suggest otherwise.26
Voluntary resolution
Arguments over Brown Act issues often become emotional on all sides. Newspapers trumpet relatively minor violations, unhappy residents fume over an action, and legislative bodies clam up about information better discussed in public. Hard lines are drawn and rational discussion breaks down. The district attorney or even the grand jury occasionally becomes involved. Publicity surrounding alleged violations of the Brown Act can result in a loss of confidence by constituents in the legislative body. There are times when it may be preferable to consider re-noticing and rehearing, rather than litigating, an item of significant public interest, particularly when there is any doubt about whether the open meeting requirements were satisfied.
At bottom, agencies that regularly train their officials and pay close attention to the requirements of the
Brown Act will have little reason to worry about
enforcement.
ENDNOTES:
1 California Government Code section 54960.1.
Invalidation is limited to actions that violate the
following sections of the Brown Act: section 54953 (the basic open meeting provision); sections 54954.2 and
54954.5 (notice and agenda requirements for regular
meetings and closed sessions); 54954.6 (tax hearings);
54956 (special meetings); and 54596.5 (emergency
situations). Violations of sections not listed above
cannot give rise to invalidation actions, but are subject to the other remedies listed in section 54960.1.
2 Castaic Lake Water Agency v. Newhall County Water
District (2015) 238 Cal.App.4th 1196, 1198
3 California Government Code section 54960.1 (b) and
(c)(1)
4 McKee v. Orange Unified School District (2003) 110 Cal.
App.4th 1310, 1318-1319
5 Cohan v. City of Thousand Oaks (1994) 30 Cal.App.4th 547, 556, 561 6 Boyle v. City of Redondo Beach (1999) 70 Cal.App.4th 1109, 1116-17, 1118 7 Government Code Section 54960.2(a); Senate Bill No. 1003, Section 4 (2011-2012 Session) 8 Government Code Sections 54960.2(a)(1), (2)
9 Government Code Section 54960.2(b)
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
60 OPEN & PUBLIC V: A GUIDE TO THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT
CHAPTER 6: REMEDIES
10 Government Code Section 54960.2(a)(4)
11 Government Code Section 54960.2(c)(2)
12 Government Code Section 54960.2(c)(1)
13 Government Code Section 54960.2(c)(3)
14 Government Code Section 54960.2(d)
15 Government Code Section 54960.2(e)
16 California Alliance for Utility Safety and Education (CAUSE) v. City of San Diego (1997) 56 Cal.App.4th 1024; Common Cause v. Stirling (1983) 147 Cal.App.3d 518, 524; Accord Shapiro v. San Diego City Council (2002) 96 Cal. App. 4th 904, 916 & fn.6
17 Kleitman v. Superior Court (1999) 74 Cal.App.4th 324, 334-36 18 Los Angeles Times Communications, LLC v. Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors (2003) 112 Cal.
App.4th 1313, 1327-29 and cases cited therein
19 California Government Code section 54960.5
20 California Government Code section 54959. A misdemeanor is punishable by a fine of up to $1,000 or up to six months in county jail, or both. California Penal Code section 19. Employees of the agency who participate in violations of the Brown Act cannot be punished criminally under section 54959.
However, at least one district attorney instituted criminal action against employees based on the theory that they criminally conspired with the members of the legislative body to commit a crime under section 54949.
21 California Government Code section 54959
22 California Government Code section 54952.6
23 61 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen.283 (1978)
24 California Government Code section 54959
25 California Government Code section 1222 provides that “[e]very wilful omission to perform any duty enjoined by law upon any public officer, or person holding any public trust or employment, where no special provision is made for the punishment of such delinquency, is punishable as a misdemeanor.” 26 The principle of statutory construction known as expressio unius est exclusio alterius supports the view that section 54959 is the exclusive basis for criminal liability under the Brown Act.
Updates to this publication responding to changes in the Brown Act or new court interpretations are available at www.cacities.org/opengovernment. A current version of the Brown Act may be found at www.leginfo.ca.gov.
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
1400 K Street, Suite 400, Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 658-8200 | Fax: (916) 658-8240
www.cacities.org | www.cacities.org/events | www.westerncity.com January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
Rosenberg’s Rules of Order
REVISED 2011
Simple Rules of Parliamentary Procedure for the 21st Century By Judge Dave Rosenberg
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
ii
MISSION and CORE BELIEFS
To expand and protect local control for cities through education and advocacy to enhance the quality of life for all Californians.
VISION
To be recognized and respected as the leading advocate for the common interests of California’s cities.
About the League of California Cities
Established in 1898, the League of California Cities is a member organization that represents California’s incorporated cities.
The League strives to protect the local authority and automony of city government and help California’s cities effectively serve their residents. In addition to advocating on cities’ behalf at the state capitol, the League provides its members with professional development programs and information resources, conducts education conferences and research, and publishes Western City magazine.
© 2011 League of California Cities. All rights reserved.
About the Author
Dave Rosenberg is a Superior Court Judge in Yolo County. He has served as presiding judge of his court, and as presiding judge of the Superior Court Appellate Division. He also has served as chair of the Trial Court Presiding Judges Advisory Committee (the committee composed of all 58 California presiding judges) and as an advisory member of the California Judicial Council. Prior to his appointment to the bench, Rosenberg was member of the Yolo County Board of Supervisors, where he served two terms as chair. Rosenberg also served on the Davis City Council, including two terms as mayor. He has served on the senior staff of two governors, and worked for 19 years in private law practice. Rosenberg has served as a member and chair of numerous state, regional and local boards. Rosenberg chaired the California State Lottery Commission, the California Victim Compensation and Government Claims Board, the Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District, the Yolo County Economic Development Commission, and the Yolo County Criminal Justice Cabinet. For many years, he has taught classes on parliamentary procedure and has served as parliamentarian for large and small bodies.
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
1 Table of Contents
About the Author............................................................................................................ii Introduction....................................................................................................................2 Establishing a Quorum...................................................................................................2 The Role of the Chair......................................................................................................2 The Basic Format for an Agenda Item Discussion........................................................2 Motions in General.........................................................................................................3 The Three Basic Motions................................................................................................3 Multiple Motions Before the Body.................................................................................4 To Debate or Not to Debate............................................................................................4 Majority and Super-Majority Votes ...............................................................................5 Counting Votes................................................................................................................5 The Motion to Reconsider..............................................................................................6 Courtesy and Decorum ..................................................................................................7 Special Notes About Public Input..................................................................................7 January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
2 Establishing a Quorum
The starting point for a meeting is the establishment of a quorum.
A quorum is defined as the minimum number of members of the body who must be present at a meeting for business to be legally transacted. The default rule is that a quorum is one more than half the body. For example, in a five-member body a quorum is three.
When the body has three members present, it can legally transact business. If the body has less than a quorum of members present, it cannot legally transact business. And even if the body has a quorum to begin the meeting, the body can lose the quorum during the meeting when a member departs (or even when a member leaves the dais). When that occurs the body loses its ability to transact business until and unless a quorum is reestablished.
The default rule, identified above, however, gives way to a specific rule of the body that establishes a quorum. For example, the rules of a particular five-member body may indicate that a quorum is four members for that particular body. The body must follow the rules it has established for its quorum. In the absence of such a specific rule, the quorum is one more than half the members of the body.
The Role of the Chair
While all members of the body should know and understand the rules of parliamentary procedure, it is the chair of the body who is charged with applying the rules of conduct of the meeting. The chair should be well versed in those rules. For all intents and purposes, the chair makes the final ruling on the rules every time the chair states an action. In fact, all decisions by the chair are final unless overruled by the body itself.
Since the chair runs the conduct of the meeting, it is usual courtesy for the chair to play a less active role in the debate and discussion than other members of the body. This does not mean that the chair should not participate in the debate or discussion. To the contrary, as a member of the body, the chair has the full right to participate in the debate, discussion and decision-making of the body. What the chair should do, however, is strive to be the last to speak at the discussion and debate stage. The chair should not make or second a motion unless the chair is convinced that no other member of the body will do so at that point in time.
The Basic Format for an Agenda Item Discussion
Formal meetings normally have a written, often published agenda.
Informal meetings may have only an oral or understood agenda. In either case, the meeting is governed by the agenda and the agenda constitutes the body’s agreed-upon roadmap for the meeting. Each agenda item can be handled by the chair in the following basic format:
Introduction
The rules of procedure at meetings should be simple enough for most people to understand. Unfortunately, that has not always been the case. Virtually all clubs, associations, boards, councils and bodies follow a set of rules — Robert’s Rules of Order — which are embodied in a small, but complex, book. Virtually no one I know has actually read this book cover to cover. Worse yet, the book was written for another time and for another purpose. If one is chairing or running a parliament, then Robert’s Rules of Order is a dandy and quite useful handbook for procedure in that complex setting. On the other hand, if one is running a meeting of say, a five-member body with a few members of the public in attendance, a simplified version of the rules of parliamentary procedure is in order.
Hence, the birth of Rosenberg’s Rules of Order.
What follows is my version of the rules of parliamentary procedure, based on my decades of experience chairing meetings in state and local government. These rules have been simplified for the smaller bodies we chair or in which we participate, slimmed down for the 21st Century, yet retaining the basic tenets of order to which we have grown accustomed. Interestingly enough, Rosenberg’s Rules has found a welcoming audience. Hundreds of cities, counties, special districts, committees, boards, commissions, neighborhood associations and private corporations and companies have adopted Rosenberg’s Rules in lieu of Robert’s Rules because they have found them practical, logical, simple, easy to learn and user friendly.
This treatise on modern parliamentary procedure is built on a foundation supported by the following four pillars:
1. Rules should establish order. The first purpose of rules of parliamentary procedure is to establish a framework for the orderly conduct of meetings.
2. Rules should be clear. Simple rules lead to wider understanding and participation. Complex rules create two classes: those who understand and participate; and those who do not fully understand and do not fully participate.
3. Rules should be user friendly. That is, the rules must be simple enough that the public is invited into the body and feels that it has participated in the process.
4. Rules should enforce the will of the majority while protecting the rights of the minority. The ultimate purpose of rules of procedure is to encourage discussion and to facilitate decision making by the body. In a democracy, majority rules. The rules must enable the majority to express itself and fashion a result, while permitting the minority to also express itself, but not dominate, while fully participating in the process.
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
3 Ninth, the chair takes a vote. Simply asking for the “ayes” and then asking for the “nays” normally does this. If members of the body do not vote, then they “abstain.” Unless the rules of the body provide otherwise (or unless a super majority is required as delineated later in these rules), then a simple majority (as defined in law or the rules of the body as delineated later in these rules) determines whether the motion passes or is defeated.
Tenth, the chair should announce the result of the vote and what action (if any) the body has taken. In announcing the result, the chair should indicate the names of the members of the body, if any, who voted in the minority on the motion. This announcement might take the following form: “The motion passes by a vote of 3-2, with Smith and Jones dissenting. We have passed the motion requiring a 10-day notice for all future meetings of this body.”
Motions in General
Motions are the vehicles for decision making by a body. It is usually best to have a motion before the body prior to commencing discussion of an agenda item. This helps the body focus.
Motions are made in a simple two-step process. First, the chair should recognize the member of the body. Second, the member of the body makes a motion by preceding the member’s desired approach with the words “I move … ”
A typical motion might be: “I move that we give a 10-day notice in the future for all our meetings.”
The chair usually initiates the motion in one of three ways:
1. Inviting the members of the body to make a motion, for example, “A motion at this time would be in order.”
2. Suggesting a motion to the members of the body, “A motion would be in order that we give a 10-day notice in the future for all our meetings.”
3. Making the motion. As noted, the chair has every right as a member of the body to make a motion, but should normally do so only if the chair wishes to make a motion on an item but is convinced that no other member of the body is willing to step forward to do so at a particular time.
The Three Basic Motions
There are three motions that are the most common and recur often at meetings:
The basic motion. The basic motion is the one that puts forward a decision for the body’s consideration. A basic motion might be: “I move that we create a five-member committee to plan and put on our annual fundraiser.”
First, the chair should clearly announce the agenda item number and should clearly state what the agenda item subject is. The chair should then announce the format (which follows) that will be followed in considering the agenda item.
Second, following that agenda format, the chair should invite the appropriate person or persons to report on the item, including any recommendation that they might have. The appropriate person or persons may be the chair, a member of the body, a staff person, or a committee chair charged with providing input on the agenda item.
Third, the chair should ask members of the body if they have any technical questions of clarification. At this point, members of the body may ask clarifying questions to the person or persons who reported on the item, and that person or persons should be given time to respond.
Fourth, the chair should invite public comments, or if appropriate at a formal meeting, should open the public meeting for public input.
If numerous members of the public indicate a desire to speak to the subject, the chair may limit the time of public speakers. At the conclusion of the public comments, the chair should announce that public input has concluded (or the public hearing, as the case may be, is closed).
Fifth, the chair should invite a motion. The chair should announce the name of the member of the body who makes the motion.
Sixth, the chair should determine if any member of the body wishes to second the motion. The chair should announce the name of the member of the body who seconds the motion. It is normally good practice for a motion to require a second before proceeding to ensure that it is not just one member of the body who is interested in a particular approach. However, a second is not an absolute requirement, and the chair can proceed with consideration and vote on a motion even when there is no second. This is a matter left to the discretion of the chair.
Seventh, if the motion is made and seconded, the chair should make sure everyone understands the motion.
This is done in one of three ways:
1. The chair can ask the maker of the motion to repeat it;
2. The chair can repeat the motion; or
3. The chair can ask the secretary or the clerk of the body to repeat the motion.
Eighth, the chair should now invite discussion of the motion by the body. If there is no desired discussion, or after the discussion has ended, the chair should announce that the body will vote on the motion. If there has been no discussion or very brief discussion, then the vote on the motion should proceed immediately and there is no need to repeat the motion. If there has been substantial discussion, then it is normally best to make sure everyone understands the motion by repeating it.
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
4 First, the chair would deal with the third (the last) motion on the floor, the substitute motion. After discussion and debate, a vote would be taken first on the third motion. If the substitute motion passed, it would be a substitute for the basic motion and would eliminate it. The first motion would be moot, as would the second motion (which sought to amend the first motion), and the action on the agenda item would be completed on the passage by the body of the third motion (the substitute motion). No vote would be taken on the first or second motions.
Second, if the substitute motion failed, the chair would then deal with the second (now the last) motion on the floor, the motion to amend. The discussion and debate would focus strictly on the amendment (should the committee be five or 10 members). If the motion to amend passed, the chair would then move to consider the main motion (the first motion) as amended. If the motion to amend failed, the chair would then move to consider the main motion (the first motion) in its original format, not amended.
Third, the chair would now deal with the first motion that was placed on the floor. The original motion would either be in its original format (five-member committee), or if amended, would be in its amended format (10-member committee). The question on the floor for discussion and decision would be whether a committee should plan and put on the annual fundraiser.
To Debate or Not to Debate
The basic rule of motions is that they are subject to discussion and debate. Accordingly, basic motions, motions to amend, and substitute motions are all eligible, each in their turn, for full discussion before and by the body. The debate can continue as long as members of the body wish to discuss an item, subject to the decision of the chair that it is time to move on and take action.
There are exceptions to the general rule of free and open debate on motions. The exceptions all apply when there is a desire of the body to move on. The following motions are not debatable (that is, when the following motions are made and seconded, the chair must immediately call for a vote of the body without debate on the motion):
Motion to adjourn. This motion, if passed, requires the body to immediately adjourn to its next regularly scheduled meeting. It requires a simple majority vote.
Motion to recess. This motion, if passed, requires the body to immediately take a recess. Normally, the chair determines the length of the recess which may be a few minutes or an hour. It requires a simple majority vote.
Motion to fix the time to adjourn. This motion, if passed, requires the body to adjourn the meeting at the specific time set in the motion. For example, the motion might be: “I move we adjourn this meeting at midnight.” It requires a simple majority vote.
The motion to amend. If a member wants to change a basic motion that is before the body, they would move to amend it. A motion to amend might be: “I move that we amend the motion to have a 10-member committee.” A motion to amend takes the basic motion that is before the body and seeks to change it in some way.
The substitute motion. If a member wants to completely do away with the basic motion that is before the body, and put a new motion before the body, they would move a substitute motion. A substitute motion might be: “I move a substitute motion that we cancel the annual fundraiser this year.”
“Motions to amend” and “substitute motions” are often confused, but they are quite different, and their effect (if passed) is quite different.
A motion to amend seeks to retain the basic motion on the floor, but modify it in some way. A substitute motion seeks to throw out the basic motion on the floor, and substitute a new and different motion for it. The decision as to whether a motion is really a “motion to amend” or a “substitute motion” is left to the chair. So if a member makes what that member calls a “motion to amend,” but the chair determines that it is really a “substitute motion,” then the chair’s designation governs.
A “friendly amendment” is a practical parliamentary tool that is simple, informal, saves time and avoids bogging a meeting down with numerous formal motions. It works in the following way: In the discussion on a pending motion, it may appear that a change to the motion is desirable or may win support for the motion from some members. When that happens, a member who has the floor may simply say, “I want to suggest a friendly amendment to the motion.” The member suggests the friendly amendment, and if the maker and the person who seconded the motion pending on the floor accepts the friendly amendment, that now becomes the pending motion on the floor. If either the maker or the person who seconded rejects the proposed friendly amendment, then the proposer can formally move to amend.
Multiple Motions Before the Body
There can be up to three motions on the floor at the same time.
The chair can reject a fourth motion until the chair has dealt with the three that are on the floor and has resolved them. This rule has practical value. More than three motions on the floor at any given time is confusing and unwieldy for almost everyone, including the chair.
When there are two or three motions on the floor (after motions and seconds) at the same time, the vote should proceed first on the last motion that is made. For example, assume the first motion is a basic “motion to have a five-member committee to plan and put on our annual fundraiser.” During the discussion of this motion, a member might make a second motion to “amend the main motion to have a 10-member committee, not a five-member committee to plan and put on our annual fundraiser.” And perhaps, during that discussion, a member makes yet a third motion as a “substitute motion that we not have an annual fundraiser this year.” The proper procedure would be as follows:
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
5 Motion to close nominations. When choosing officers of the body (such as the chair), nominations are in order either from a nominating committee or from the floor of the body. A motion to close nominations effectively cuts off the right of the minority to nominate officers and it requires a two-thirds vote to pass.
Motion to object to the consideration of a question. Normally, such a motion is unnecessary since the objectionable item can be tabled or defeated straight up. However, when members of a body do not even want an item on the agenda to be considered, then such a motion is in order. It is not debatable, and it requires a two-thirds vote to pass.
Motion to suspend the rules. This motion is debatable, but requires a two-thirds vote to pass. If the body has its own rules of order, conduct or procedure, this motion allows the body to suspend the rules for a particular purpose. For example, the body (a private club) might have a rule prohibiting the attendance at meetings by non-club members. A motion to suspend the rules would be in order to allow a non-club member to attend a meeting of the club on a particular date or on a particular agenda item.
Counting Votes
The matter of counting votes starts simple, but can become complicated.
Usually, it’s pretty easy to determine whether a particular motion passed or whether it was defeated. If a simple majority vote is needed to pass a motion, then one vote more than 50 percent of the body is required. For example, in a five-member body, if the vote is three in favor and two opposed, the motion passes. If it is two in favor and three opposed, the motion is defeated.
If a two-thirds majority vote is needed to pass a motion, then how many affirmative votes are required? The simple rule of thumb is to count the “no” votes and double that count to determine how many “yes” votes are needed to pass a particular motion. For example, in a seven-member body, if two members vote “no” then the “yes” vote of at least four members is required to achieve a two-thirds majority vote to pass the motion.
What about tie votes? In the event of a tie, the motion always fails since an affirmative vote is required to pass any motion. For example, in a five-member body, if the vote is two in favor and two opposed, with one member absent, the motion is defeated.
Vote counting starts to become complicated when members vote “abstain” or in the case of a written ballot, cast a blank (or unreadable) ballot. Do these votes count, and if so, how does one count them? The starting point is always to check the statutes.
In California, for example, for an action of a board of supervisors to be valid and binding, the action must be approved by a majority of the board. (California Government Code Section 25005.) Typically, this means three of the five members of the board must vote affirmatively in favor of the action. A vote of 2-1 would not be sufficient. A vote of 3-0 with two abstentions would be sufficient. In general law cities in Motion to table. This motion, if passed, requires discussion of the agenda item to be halted and the agenda item to be placed on “hold.” The motion can contain a specific time in which the item can come back to the body. “I move we table this item until our regular meeting in October.” Or the motion can contain no specific time for the return of the item, in which case a motion to take the item off the table and bring it back to the body will have to be taken at a future meeting. A motion to table an item (or to bring it back to the body) requires a simple majority vote.
Motion to limit debate. The most common form of this motion is to say, “I move the previous question” or “I move the question” or “I call the question” or sometimes someone simply shouts out “question.” As a practical matter, when a member calls out one of these phrases, the chair can expedite matters by treating it as a “request” rather than as a formal motion. The chair can simply inquire of the body, “any further discussion?” If no one wishes to have further discussion, then the chair can go right to the pending motion that is on the floor.
However, if even one person wishes to discuss the pending motion further, then at that point, the chair should treat the call for the “question” as a formal motion, and proceed to it.
When a member of the body makes such a motion (“I move the previous question”), the member is really saying: “I’ve had enough debate. Let’s get on with the vote.” When such a motion is made, the chair should ask for a second, stop debate, and vote on the motion to limit debate. The motion to limit debate requires a two-thirds vote of the body.
Note: A motion to limit debate could include a time limit. For example: “I move we limit debate on this agenda item to 15 minutes.” Even in this format, the motion to limit debate requires a twothirds vote of the body. A similar motion is a motion to object to consideration of an item. This motion is not debatable, and if passed, precludes the body from even considering an item on the agenda. It also requires a two-thirds vote.
Majority and Super Majority Votes
In a democracy, a simple majority vote determines a question. A tie vote means the motion fails. So in a seven-member body, a vote of 4-3 passes the motion. A vote of 3-3 with one abstention means the motion fails. If one member is absent and the vote is 3-3, the motion still fails.
All motions require a simple majority, but there are a few exceptions.
The exceptions come up when the body is taking an action which effectively cuts off the ability of a minority of the body to take an action or discuss an item. These extraordinary motions require a two-thirds majority (a super majority) to pass:
Motion to limit debate. Whether a member says, “I move the previous question,” or “I move the question,” or “I call the question,” or “I move to limit debate,” it all amounts to an attempt to cut off the ability of the minority to discuss an item, and it requires a two-thirds vote to pass.
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
6 Now, exactly how does a member cast an “abstention” vote? Any time a member votes “abstain” or says, “I abstain,” that is an abstention. However, if a member votes “present” that is also treated as an abstention (the member is essentially saying, “Count me for purposes of a quorum, but my vote on the issue is abstain.”) In fact, any manifestation of intention not to vote either “yes” or “no” on the pending motion may be treated by the chair as an abstention. If written ballots are cast, a blank or unreadable ballot is counted as an abstention as well.
Can a member vote “absent” or “count me as absent?” Interesting question. The ruling on this is up to the chair. The better approach is for the chair to count this as if the member had left his/her chair and is actually “absent.” That, of course, affects the quorum. However, the chair may also treat this as a vote to abstain, particularly if the person does not actually leave the dais.
The Motion to Reconsider
There is a special and unique motion that requires a bit of explanation all by itself; the motion to reconsider. A tenet of parliamentary procedure is finality. After vigorous discussion, debate and a vote, there must be some closure to the issue. And so, after a vote is taken, the matter is deemed closed, subject only to reopening if a proper motion to consider is made and passed.
A motion to reconsider requires a majority vote to pass like other garden-variety motions, but there are two special rules that apply only to the motion to reconsider.
First, is the matter of timing. A motion to reconsider must be made at the meeting where the item was first voted upon. A motion to reconsider made at a later time is untimely. (The body, however, can always vote to suspend the rules and, by a two-thirds majority, allow a motion to reconsider to be made at another time.)
Second, a motion to reconsider may be made only by certain members of the body. Accordingly, a motion to reconsider may be made only by a member who voted in the majority on the original motion. If such a member has a change of heart, he or she may make the motion to reconsider (any other member of the body — including a member who voted in the minority on the original motion — may second the motion). If a member who voted in the minority seeks to make the motion to reconsider, it must be ruled out of order. The purpose of this rule is finality. If a member of minority could make a motion to reconsider, then the item could be brought back to the body again and again, which would defeat the purpose of finality.
If the motion to reconsider passes, then the original matter is back before the body, and a new original motion is in order. The matter may be discussed and debated as if it were on the floor for the first time.
California, as another example, resolutions or orders for the payment of money and all ordinances require a recorded vote of the total members of the city council. (California Government Code Section 36936.) Cities with charters may prescribe their own vote requirements. Local elected officials are always well-advised to consult with their local agency counsel on how state law may affect the vote count.
After consulting state statutes, step number two is to check the rules of the body. If the rules of the body say that you count votes of “those present” then you treat abstentions one way. However, if the rules of the body say that you count the votes of those “present and voting,” then you treat abstentions a different way. And if the rules of the body are silent on the subject, then the general rule of thumb (and default rule) is that you count all votes that are “present and voting.” Accordingly, under the “present and voting” system, you would NOT count abstention votes on the motion. Members who abstain are counted for purposes of determining quorum (they are “present”), but you treat the abstention votes on the motion as if they did not exist (they are not “voting”). On the other hand, if the rules of the body specifically say that you count votes of those “present” then you DO count abstention votes both in establishing the quorum and on the motion. In this event, the abstention votes act just like “no” votes.
How does this work in practice?
Here are a few examples.
Assume that a five-member city council is voting on a motion that requires a simple majority vote to pass, and assume further that the body has no specific rule on counting votes. Accordingly, the default rule kicks in and we count all votes of members that are “present and voting.” If the vote on the motion is 3-2, the motion passes. If the motion is 2-2 with one abstention, the motion fails.
Assume a five-member city council voting on a motion that requires a two-thirds majority vote to pass, and further assume that the body has no specific rule on counting votes. Again, the default rule applies.
If the vote is 3-2, the motion fails for lack of a two-thirds majority. If the vote is 4-1, the motion passes with a clear two-thirds majority. A vote of three “yes,” one “no” and one “abstain” also results in passage of the motion. Once again, the abstention is counted only for the purpose of determining quorum, but on the actual vote on the motion, it is as if the abstention vote never existed — so an effective 3-1 vote is clearly a two-thirds majority vote.
Now, change the scenario slightly. Assume the same five-member city council voting on a motion that requires a two-thirds majority vote to pass, but now assume that the body DOES have a specific rule requiring a two-thirds vote of members “present.” Under this specific rule, we must count the members present not only for quorum but also for the motion. In this scenario, any abstention has the same force and effect as if it were a “no” vote. Accordingly, if the votes were three “yes,” one “no” and one “abstain,” then the motion fails. The abstention in this case is treated like a “no” vote and effective vote of 3-2 is not enough to pass two-thirds majority muster.
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
7 Appeal. If the chair makes a ruling that a member of the body disagrees with, that member may appeal the ruling of the chair. If the motion is seconded, and after debate, if it passes by a simple majority vote, then the ruling of the chair is deemed reversed.
Call for orders of the day. This is simply another way of saying, “return to the agenda.” If a member believes that the body has drifted from the agreed-upon agenda, such a call may be made. It does not require a vote, and when the chair discovers that the agenda has not been followed, the chair simply reminds the body to return to the agenda item properly before them. If the chair fails to do so, the chair’s determination may be appealed.
Withdraw a motion. During debate and discussion of a motion, the maker of the motion on the floor, at any time, may interrupt a speaker to withdraw his or her motion from the floor. The motion is immediately deemed withdrawn, although the chair may ask the person who seconded the motion if he or she wishes to make the motion, and any other member may make the motion if properly recognized.
Special Notes About Public Input
The rules outlined above will help make meetings very publicfriendly. But in addition, and particularly for the chair, it is wise to remember three special rules that apply to each agenda item:
Rule One: Tell the public what the body will be doing.
Rule Two: Keep the public informed while the body is doing it.
Rule Three: When the body has acted, tell the public what the body did.
Courtesy and Decorum
The rules of order are meant to create an atmosphere where the members of the body and the members of the public can attend to business efficiently, fairly and with full participation. At the same time, it is up to the chair and the members of the body to maintain common courtesy and decorum. Unless the setting is very informal, it is always best for only one person at a time to have the floor, and it is always best for every speaker to be first recognized by the chair before proceeding to speak.
The chair should always ensure that debate and discussion of an agenda item focuses on the item and the policy in question, not the personalities of the members of the body. Debate on policy is healthy, debate on personalities is not. The chair has the right to cut off discussion that is too personal, is too loud, or is too crude.
Debate and discussion should be focused, but free and open. In the interest of time, the chair may, however, limit the time allotted to speakers, including members of the body.
Can a member of the body interrupt the speaker? The general rule is “no.” There are, however, exceptions. A speaker may be interrupted for the following reasons:
Privilege. The proper interruption would be, “point of privilege.” The chair would then ask the interrupter to “state your point.” Appropriate points of privilege relate to anything that would interfere with the normal comfort of the meeting. For example, the room may be too hot or too cold, or a blowing fan might interfere with a person’s ability to hear.
Order. The proper interruption would be, “point of order.” Again, the chair would ask the interrupter to “state your point.” Appropriate points of order relate to anything that would not be considered appropriate conduct of the meeting. For example, if the chair moved on to a vote on a motion that permits debate without allowing that discussion or debate.
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
1400 K Street, Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 658-8200 | Fax (916) 658-8240
www.cacities.org
To order additional copies of this publication, call (916) 658-8200. $10
© 2011 League of California Cities. All rights reserved.
Printed on recycled paper.
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
1 City of Lindsay
Social Media Policy
Adopted on 08/09/2022 via Resolution No. 22-48
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
2 Overview
This policy establishes guidelines for the establishment and use by the City of Lindsay of social media sites (including but not limited to Facebook and Instagram) as a means of conveying City of Lindsay (“City”) information to its citizens.
The intended purpose behind establishing City of Lindsay social media sites is to disseminate information from the City, about the City, to its citizens. The City of Lindsay has an overriding interest in deciding what is “spoken” on behalf of the City on City social media sites.
For purposes of this policy, “social media” is understood to be content created by individuals, using accessible, expandable, and upgradable publishing technologies, through and on the Internet. Examples of social media include, but are not limited to, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Twitter, LinkedIn, and blogs. For purposes of this policy, “comments” include information, articles, pictures, videos or any other form of communicative content posted on a City of Lindsay social media site, either as its own post or attached to another post.
General Policy
1. The establishment and use by any City department of City social media sites are subject to approval by the City Manager or his/her designees. All City of Lindsay social media sites shall be administered by City of Lindsay designated staff.
2. City social media sites should make clear on their respective profile pages that they are maintained by the City of Lindsay and that they follow the City’s Social Media Policy.
3. Wherever possible, City social media sites should link back to the official City of Lindsay website for forms, documents, online services and other information necessary to conduct business with the City of Lindsay.
4. Designated staff will monitor content on City social media sites to ensure adherence to both the City’s Social Media Policy and the interest and goals of the City of Lindsay.
5. The City reserves the right to restrict or remove any content that is deemed in violation of this Social Media Policy or any applicable law. Any content removed based on these guidelines must be retained by the City Clerk for a reasonable period of time, including the time, date and identity of the poster, when available.
6. These guidelines must be displayed to users or made available by hyperlink.
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
3 7. The City will approach the use of social media tools as consistently as possible, enterprise wide.
8. The City of Lindsay’s website at https://www.lindsay.ca.us/ will remain the City’s primary and predominant internet presence.
9. All City social media sites shall adhere to applicable federal, state and local laws, regulations and policies.
10. City social media sites are subject to the California Public Records Act. Any content maintained in a social media format that is related to City business, including a list of subscribers, posted communication, and communication submitted for posting, may be a public record subject to public disclosure.
11. Employees representing the City government via City social media sites must conduct themselves at all times as a representative of the City and in accordance with all City policies.
12. This Social Media Policy may be revised at any time.
13. Comments on topics or issues not within the jurisdictional purview of the City of Lindsay may be removed.
14. Any posts deemed to be offensive, derogatory, hostile, or anything that is construed as discriminatory on the basis of race, sex, disability, or religion will be removed.
15. The City does not endorse any links or advertisements that may show up on its Facebook page.
Comment Policy
By posting or commenting on the City of Lindsay’s Facebook page, or other City of Lindsay social media, you agree to the terms of use of the City of Lindsay’s social media comment policy as provided herein.
1. As a public entity the City must abide by certain standards to serve all its constituents in a civil and unbiased manner.
2. The City of Lindsay Facebook and other social media pages are intended to be “family friendly,” so please keep your comments clean by following these simple rules. In addition to keeping it family friendly, we require that you follow our posting guidelines here. Please note that we utilize Facebook’s automatic content filtering feature. All City of Lindsay social media content is subject to monitoring.
3. The intended purpose behind establishing City of Lindsay social media sites is to disseminate information from the City, about the City, to its citizens.
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
4 4. Comments containing any of the following inappropriate forms of content shall not be permitted on City of Lindsay social media sites and are subject to removal and/or restriction by designated staff.
a. Comments not related to the original topic, including random or unintelligible comments; Profane, obscene, violent, or pornographic content and/or language;
b. Content that promotes, fosters or perpetuates discrimination on the basis of race, creed, color, age, religion, gender, or national origin; c. Defamatory or personal attacks;
d. Threats to any person or organization;
e. Comments in support of, or in opposition to, any political campaigns or ballot measures;
f. Solicitation of commerce, including but not limited to advertising of any business or product for sale;
g. Conduct in violation of any federal, state or local law; h. Encouragement of illegal activity;
i. Information that may tend to compromise the safety or security of the public or public systems; or
j. Content that violates a legal ownership interest, such as a copyright, of any party.
k. Harassment or content which constitutes and/or facilitates stalking; l. Content which violates the right to privacy;
m. Encouragement of violence;
n. Repetitive content;
o. Comments which may reasonably interfere with, inhibit, or compromise law enforcement investigations, police tactics, police responses to incidents and/or the safety of police staff and officers; p. Posts or comments that contain any external links.
5. A comment posted by a member of the public on any City of Lindsay social media site is the opinion of the commentator or poster only, and publication of a comment does not imply endorsement of, or agreement by, the City of Lindsay, nor do such comments necessarily reflect the opinions or policies of the City of Lindsay.
6. The City of Lindsay reserves the right to deny access to City of Lindsay social media sites for any individual, who violates the City of Lindsay’s Social Media Policy, at any time and without prior notice.
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
5 7. Comments posted to City of Lindsay social media pages will be monitored and inappropriate content as defined above will be removed as soon as possible and without prior notice. Please note, comments posted to pages are monitored and our Facebook settings will automatically hide a comment if profanity is used within the post.
8. If you need to contact the Lindsay Police Department, please call their front desk at (559) 562-2511, or if it is an emergency, call 911 and ask for assistance. While comments posted on the City’s social media pages are monitored, posting a comment is neither the recommended nor best way to contact the City or Lindsay Police Department.
9. Departments shall monitor their social media sites for comments requesting responses from the City and for comments in violation of this policy.
10. All comments posted to any City of Lindsay Facebook site are bound by Facebook’s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities and Community Standards, located at www.facebook.com/terms.php, and
www.facebook.com/communitystandards, respectfully. The City of Lindsay reserves the right to report any violation of Facebook’s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities and/or Community Standards to Facebook with the intent of Facebook taking appropriate and reasonable responsive action.
11. By posting or commenting on the City of Lindsay social media platforms you agree to our terms of use. You participate by your own choice, taking personal responsibility for your comments, your username and any information you provide therein.
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
STAFF REPORT
TO: Lindsay City Council
FROM: Francesca Quintana, City Clerk & Assistant to the City Manager DEPARTMENT: City Manager
ITEM NO.: 9.2
MEETING DATE: January 09, 2024
ACTION & RECOMMENDATION
Formation of Economic Development Ad-Hoc Committee.
As requested by Mayor Cerros, this item is informational and presented only for the purpose of discussion. No City Council action is required at this time. However, the City Council is asked to consider the formation of an Economic Development Ad-Hoc Committee.
BACKGROUND | ANALYSIS
The City Council is asked to consider the formation of an Economic Development Ad-Hoc Committee.
Should the Council indicate that they would like to proceed, City Staff asks that they provide direction on the following:
• Number of committee members
• Committee goals and objectives
• Preferred dates and times for meetings
• Number of committee meetings
• Committee composition criteria
• Committee application process (if any)
FISCAL IMPACT
No fiscal impact associated with this action.
ATTACHMENTS
• None
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
STAFF REPORT
TO: Lindsay City Council
FROM: Francesca Quintana, City Clerk & Assistant to the City Manager DEPARTMENT: City Manager
ITEM NO.: 10.1
MEETING DATE: January 09, 2024
ACTION & RECOMMENDATION
Review Existing Appointments and Consider the Approval of Appointment of Council Member Representatives to Boards, Agencies, and Committees.
City Staff recommends that Council consider their level of involvement, their schedule, and consider if appointments should be re-assigned based on Council Member’s interests.
BACKGROUND | ANALYSIS
The City Council last appointed representatives to various boards, agencies, and committees in December of 2022. Staff is notifying Council of these appointments and asking them to consider their level of involvement, their schedule, and consider if appointments should be re-assigned based on Council Member’s interests. Maintaining active representation is critical to the long-term success of the City.
Table 1: Boards, Agencies, and Committees Appointments (effective December 12, 2023) January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
FISCAL IMPACT
No fiscal impact associated with this action.
ATTACHMENTS
• Boards, Agencies, and Committees Appointments Table
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council
BOARDS, AGENCIES, AND COMMITTEES APPOINTMENTS
(EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 12, 2023)
Board, Agency, or Committee Name Meeting Time Council Member Representative Council Member Representative Alternate
Integrated Regional Water Management
(IRWM)
First Tuesday of every month at 9:00 AM Mayor Cerros Council Member Flores East Kaweah Groundwater Sustainability
Agency (EKGSA)
Fourth Monday of the first month of every quarter at 3:00 PM
Mayor Cerros Council Member Sanchez
Tulare County Association of Government
(TCAG) Board of Governors
Third Monday of every month at 1:00 PM Mayor Cerros Council Member Caudillo Tulare County Regional Transit Agency
(TCRTA) Board of Directors
Third Monday of every month at 6:00 PM Mayor Cerros Council Member Sanchez Lindsay Wellness Center Programming
Committee
Quarterly on Monday’s at 6:00 PM Mayor Pro Tem Serna
*Per Committee establishment, two (2) Council Members are required
Council Member Sanchez
*Per Committee establishment, two (2) Council Members are required
Healthy Kids Healthy Lindsay Quarterly, select Weekday’s at 3:30 PM Mayor Cerros *Per Committee Bylaws, the Mayor is automatically the Board Member
Mayor Pro Tem Serna
*Per Committee Policy, the Mayor Pro Tem is automatically the Alternate Board Member
Tulare County City Selection Committee Quarterly, select Weekday’s at 4:00 PM, or on an as-needed basis
Mayor Cerros
*Per committee Bylaws, the Mayor is automatically the
selected member
Council Member Flores
Friday Night Market Operations Ad-Hoc
Oversight Committee
As-needed basis Council Member Caudillo
*Per Agreement with Market Operator, two (2) Council
Member Representatives are needed
Mayor Cerros
*Per Agreement with Market Operator, two (2) Council
Member Representatives are needed
San Joaquin Valley (SJV) Air Pollution
Control
District Special City Selection Committee
As-needed basis, typically in the evenings Mayor Cerros None Tulare County Council of Cities Bimonthly, Third Wednesday at 4:00 PM, or on an as-needed basis
Council Member Flores Mayor Cerros
City Sign Ordinance Ad-Hoc Committee Three (3) times throughout the year, or on an as-needed basis, typically in the evenings
Mayor Cerros
*Per Committee establishment, two (2) Council Members are required
Council Member Sanchez
*Per Committee establishment, two (2) Council Members are required
City Water Ad-Hoc Committee Three (3) times throughout the year, or on an as-needed basis, typically in the evenings
Mayor Cerros
*Per Committee establishment, two (2) Council Members are required
Council Member Sanchez
*Per Committee establishment, two (2) Council Members are required
January 09, 2024 Regular Meeting of the Lindsay City Council