Lompoc’s City Council received its second Brown Act warning last month from the Santa Barbara County District Attorney’s office.
The warning came in response to complaints that the City Council held a closed session on Sept. 15, 2015, to discuss its position on a pending exclusive negotiating agreement (ENA) with the California Space Center for the development of an 82-acre parcel in Lompoc, when the discussion should have been held in public session.
The Brown Act aims to facilitate public participation in local government decisions by requiring public meetings on most topics of discussion. According to Chief Deputy District Attorney Kelly Scott’s letter to Lompoc’s City Council, certain real estate discussions are exempt from the Brown Act’s open meeting requirements. However, the discussions at Lompoc City Council’s Sept. 15 closed meeting included too much information to fall under the real estate exemptions.
Scott said the District Attorney’s warning doesn’t prove criminal violation of the Brown Act, which would require proof that the councilmembers knew, understood, and intentionally violated the law. She told the Sun this was not necessarily the case for the City Council’s Sept. 15 meeting.
“They believe they didn’t violate the law because they believe there was an exemption to the Brown Act that allowed them to speak about this topic in closed session,” Scott said. “What we’re saying is they actually interpreted that exemption too broadly.”
This is the second Brown Act warning the District Attorney’s office has issued to Lompoc’s City Council. The first came in November 2014, also from Scott, after residents complained about a series of decisions made by councilmembers and city officials regarding the non-permitted operation of a recreational sports facility. These decisions were made in closed session without public notification.
“I didn’t necessarily include that they’d violated the Brown Act, but I warned them that they were very close to engaging in serial meetings, which is a violation of the Brown Act,” Scott said of her 2014 warning to the City Council.
Scott’s most recent letter to Lompoc’s City Council concluded that its Sept. 15 closed session discussions should have been public, and requested that the council “only use the real estate exception in the limited circumstances provided for” by the law.
This article appears in Jul 7-14, 2016.