Advertisement
Not a member of Pastebin yet?
Sign Up,
it unlocks many cool features!
- Subject: Re: CBOC Audit Committee Meeting Friday, February 17, 2012
- Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 12:12:53 -0800
- From: Don Gosney <dongosney@comcast.net>
- To: Charles Cowens <charley@cowens.net>
- CC: Bruce Harter <BHarter@wccusd.net>, Bill Fay <BFay@wccusd.net>,
- Magdy Abdalla <mabdalla@wccusd.net>, Martin Coyne <MCoyne@wccusd.net>,
- Robert Studdiford <studdiford@gmail.com>, Norma Martinez-Rubin
- <norma@evaluationfocused.com>, Tony Thurmond <tony@tonythurmond.com>,
- Charles Ramsey <charamsey@comcast.net>, Madeline Kronenberg
- <MKRONEN@aol.com>, Elaine Merriweather <elainemerriweather@gmail.com>,
- Antonio Medrano <amedrano3@sbcglobal.net>
- Elected bodies have confidential meetings all of the time. When they
- meet with attorneys, when they're dealing with litigation or contract
- issues, when they're in negotiations--these are all exempted from the
- Brown Act. The Brown Act does not go so far as to directly address
- subcommittees but when a sub group smaller than half of the body meets
- they are not in violation of the Brown Act. For instance, we’re having a
- subcommittee meeting right now with this communiqué but it’s not
- required to be noticed, agendized, recorded or anything else.
- Do you or Anton insist on being a part of every subcommittee meeting of
- your City Council, County Supervisors Municipal Advisory Committee or
- other legislative body? Why do you suppose that all of these
- bodies—going all the way up to the State legislature—can get away with
- not inviting the public to attend every confidential meeting but here at
- the level of the School Board Bond Oversight Committee it’s a requirement?
- Have you or Anton ever insisted that you be allowed to sit in on the
- contract negotiations with the teachers, expulsion discussions or
- meetings with the attorneys when we’re sued or suing someone?
- Anton never seemed to have a problem with holding meetings like this
- when he was on the body or the sub-body but now that he’s not does he
- feel that we’re in violation of the law? Is there a double standard
- playing out here?
- As for speaking with the District’s legal counsel, I don’t know who that
- person is but I can’t imagine that they are without counsel. Considering
- the number of times we’re either sued or a citizen demands something I
- would think they have someone on standby to handle these situations. Of
- course, you could ask Dr. Harter and he could tell you the proper steps
- to take. But since the information I’ve been telling you all has come
- partly from Dr. Harter, I’m guessing that the people that are having a
- difficult time with this wouldn’t believe him anyway.
- Don
- On 2/16/12 11:59 AM, "Charles Cowens" <charley@cowens.net> wrote:
- > Anton,
- >
- > I do have serious Brown Act misgivings about the use of subcommittees on
- > CBOC. Handling confidential information and complying with Brown Act
- > requirements like meeting notice are not incompatible. I plan on asking
- > outside organizations concerned with open government about this. When I
- > have information from these organizations, I will go from there.
- >
- > Don,
- >
- > How exactly do you "address the District's attorneys directly"? Who are
- > they? I thought the District got rid of the position of District
- > Counsel. This would certainly be a nice time to have someone like that.
- >
- > Charley Cowens
- >
- > On 2/16/2012 9:53 AM, Don Gosney wrote:
- > > As I understand it, you are incorrect in that these meetings fall under
- > > the Brown Act and they are not open to the public. There is
- > > _confidential information_ discussed at these meetings that the general
- > > public is not privy to. This meeting is not noticed, there is no agenda,
- > > no minutes, no public comment and probably not even any coffee and
- donuts.
- > >
- > > Once the audit has been completed a draft version will be made available
- > > to the public and it will be presented to the CBOC for their
- > > consideration before being presented to the Board for their acceptance.
- > >
- > > This issue of subcommittee meetings being subject to the Brown Act has
- > > been brought up with you in the past, Anton, and nothing has changed.
- > >
- > > If you want to pursue this further, you might want to address the
- > > District’s attorneys directly.
- > >
- > > Don Gosney
- > > 929 Lassen Street
- > > Richmond, CA 94805-1030
- > > Home Office: (510) 233-2060
- > > Mobile: (510) 685-2403
- > > dongosney@comcast.net
- > >
- > >
- > >
- > >
- > > On 2/16/12 9:43 AM, "Anton Jungherr" <ajungherr@aol.com> wrote:
- > >
- > > At the February 1, 2012 Board meting Mr. Studdiford announced a
- > > meeting of the Audit Subcommittee on February 17, 2012.
- > >
- > > It is my understanding that CBOC Subcommittee meetings are subject
- > > to the Brown Act open meeting requirement.
- > >
- > > Do you plan to publish on the CBOC web site a Brown Act notice for
- > > this meeting?
- > >
- > > Anton Jungherr
- > > 121 Ash Court
- > > Hercules, CA 94547
- > > 510.799.1141 home/office
- > > 510.697.7212 cell
- > > 510.799.2124 fax
- > >
- >
Advertisement
Add Comment
Please, Sign In to add comment
Advertisement