Last week's column discussed two incidents that occurred at the most recent Board of Supervisors meeting on May 7 where Board Chair Maureen Mulheren attempted to justify violations of the Brown Act, California's Open Meeting Law.
Mulheren argued —erroneously — that the issues were "personnel" matters that met Brown Act exceptions allowing the Board to meet in closed sessions that exclude the public.
In reality, neither item came within a country mile of meeting the Act's sole exception where an individual employee's situation may be handled in 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 by another person or employee."
That's it. Those are the sole conditions whereby a local agency may handle a so-called "personnel" issue in a closed session that excludes the public.
The two items that Mulheren claimed met the strict exception standard dealt with:
1). A budgetary issue dealing with the duties of a middle management position; and
2.) A proposed action to combine or merge Public Health and Behavioral Health into one department.
Both items are clearly proposed actions that legally and historically have always been conducted in open session in front of the public.
So Mulheren's attempts to steer the handling of what are unambiguously open session agenda items behind closed doors are illegal on their face.
Here are some of the comments and observations from people regarding last week's column.
Supervisor Mulheren posted the following statement on facebook: "To respond or not to respond?, that is the question. … There's been some letters to the editor, there have been some comments on social media about a number of things including how I run the meetings and homelessness and specific individuals. A lot of really important topics that are coming up. I'd love to address those and will be doing that here on this page [facebook: mo4mendo]. If you'd like to ask me a question instead of writing about me on the internet, it's 707 391-6664."
Mark Scaramella, long-time political reporter of the Anderson Valley Advertiser: "Perhaps a better question would be: "To respond or not to the original comment in writing?" Supervisor Mulheren could "address those comments" in writing for public review instead of with a semi-private video for her facebook friends on her own facebook page or in a private phone call. We'd be happy to post her responses.
But the County Supervisor and current Board Chair prefers to refer to comments she doesn't like indirectly phrased in her own misleading way — as she does in this recent post — with a facebook video where there's no written record and conveniently avoiding the original complaint or who made it. We're pretty sure one of the comments she's bothered by is Jim Shields' latest column pointing out Brown Act violations engineered by Supervisor Mulheren. Also criticism of her cutting off discussion of Supervisor Gjerde's mention of a senior grant-writing position that he felt was no longer required, and people disputing her claim that homelessness is down in Mendocino County. By only summarizing what she's responding to without quoting the original complaint or responding to the source, the Supervisor can paraphrase the original complaint, make it sound frivolous, tell her facebook friends how unfair they are, and avoid further discussion.
Further, she can keep the viewers of her facebook page from seeing the original complaint, depriving her facebook friends of assessing the original complaint which provoked a response. Also, the Supervisor's characterization of the comments as from "social media" (Shields and his paper the Mendocino Observer, the Ukiah Daily Journal and the AVA are not "social media") and as "writing about me" is misleading. The comments were about her performance as Board chair on the public dime in a public setting, not about her personally. Either way, since this is the way she prefers to respond, we'll be paying attention to her facebook page videos and responses as usual."
Stephen Rosenthal: "Recently there were a few comments citing the Peter Principle. Mulheren is Exhibit A. Her peak is cheerleader, anything more and she's out of her comfort zone. There have been, and are currently, numerous Mendocino County Supervisors and Administrators who display an astonishing lack of skills and intelligence. Mulheren leads the pack."
Scott Ward: "Where was County Counsel during these closed session meetings? Was legal advice given and ignored?"
Norm Thurston: "Correcting the Chairwoman in open session could result in adverse repercussions."
James Marmon: "She [Mulheren] barely won the election anyway. I thought there should have been a recount. It wouldn't take much to get her recalled now."
Lazarus: "You guys act like this is something new. The BOS has been violating the "Brown Act" since I've been paying attention. Something rarely comes from a formal complaint. Ask the men who run the AVA. It's been going on since the 'Brown Act' was born. Years ago, the Willits News busted the City Council loaning money to their cronies in a backroom meeting. All that came of it was they tried to get the Willits News people who called them on it FIRED!!! Ask around. The game is rigged…"
John Sakowicz: "Oh, how I wish Jacob Brown would have won the 2nd District seat on the BOS. Four more years of the low IQ incumbent is infuriating."
Charles S.: "Jim, thank you for bringing this insult to public light. Maureen's low regard for the public's opinion has long been known to people in Ukiah who watched her zany antics on the city council. It's all been inherited by the Board of Supervisors now. You have to say good luck to all of us because you can't say good riddance."
As I've always said, problems just don't happen, people make them happen. Thanks to Mulheren, we're dealing with a problem that we shouldn't even be thinking about let alone trying to solve.
Brown Act open meeting procedures are simply written and easy to comply with. The basic premise is the public's business must be conducted in front of the public. The problem is we have some people in county government who clearly don't give a damn about respecting the right of the people to participate in the governing process.
Jim Shields is the Mendocino County Observer's editor and publisher, observer@pacific.net, the long-time district manager of the Laytonville County Water District, and is also chairman of the Laytonville Area Municipal Advisory Council. Listen to his radio program "This and That" every Saturday at 12 noon on KPFN 105.1 FM, also streamed live: http://www.kpfn.org
No comments:
Post a Comment