time to follow the Brown Act wrote on Oct 20, 2007 9:04 PM:Not only were the meetings noticed only 24 hours in advance, but the previous councils started the closed sessions in the back room. Previous councils didn't open the meetings in the council chambers which would allow for public comment, then adjourn into closed session. If you wanted to comment on an agenda item, the city clerk had to be notified so that the council would go to the council chambers first. Is the council still eating dinner during closed session?

Leucadian wrote on Oct 20, 2007 10:06 PM:The encinitas city council doesn't try to be transparent and this issue is just the tip of the iceberg. The NCT should look at the items that are announced at the very last minute. There is no reason they can't be announced with more than 24 hours. Other Cities do it, why not Encinitas?

She's just wrong! wrote on Oct 20, 2007 10:40 PM:Per their web site, The Encinitas City Council has held closed sessions less than half the times they've had meetings. Since the closed sessions are not regular and set by statute, they are by definition "special meetings" and therefore only require 24 hour notice. It is a shame the NCTimes couldn't have the ability to see through this political grandstanding. And remember, we're talking about the time required to post the agenda for meeting's the public is barred from participating in! Get a clue, this is just B.S.politics!

Cutting Out The Public wrote on Oct 21, 2007 6:54 AM:Where does the Brown Act require 72-hour notice for a special meeting covering a closed session? A special meeting a merely meeting not held at the regularly scheduled time. Government bodies dealing with items they want to keep out of the public eye love special meetings. The Government body only has to post the meeting 24 hours in advance, and deliever notices only to newspapers, and radio and TV stations, that request notice. CA Gov Code 54956. If a member of the public wants to make sure they do not miss a special meeting, they must go by the agency's notice board at least once every 24 hours!!! A great way to cut out the public.

Toothless Paper Tiger wrote on Oct 21, 2007 7:58 AM:Can anyone cite a single instance of a public official who has been convicted under the criminal provisions of the Brown Act?

Jeeze wrote on Oct 21, 2007 10:46 AM:She's just wrong must be a city insider. Before Teresa was elected the council did bar the public. Only now the council gives the public the opportunity to speak before closed session.

Terry F. wrote on Oct 21, 2007 11:17 AM:You state: "The legal counsel for Californians Aware, an advocacy group for open government she consulted on the matter, told us he believes the practice is a 'serious Brown Act issue' that a court would probably find impermissible. He added, however, that he'd never heard the accusation made by anyone else." The latter sentence distorts what I said. What I said was that I had never heard of a public agency using special meetings to address issues that could be on the agenda of a regular meeting the same day. Your version makes it sound like the practice is not unusual -- just the complaint about it. I can assure you that this practice -- in my experience since 1980 unprecedented -- would provoke complaint whenever and wherever employed.

Thanks Teresa wrote on Oct 21, 2007 11:30 AM:And thanks NCT for a fine editorial. "She's just wrong," is the one playing politics, not Teresa Barth. Calif. Govt. Code Section 54954.2(a) says "At least 72 hours before a regular meeting, the legislative body of the local agency, or its designee, shall post an agenda containing a brief general description of each item of business to be transacted or discussed at the meeting, INCLUDING ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED IN CLOSED SESSION." Very simple to understand: if the closed session is before a regular Council Meeting, it is NOT considered to be a "special meeting." Special meetings are NOT addressed in this section of the Brown Act. The City Attorney has been using the contrivance of "special closed sessions" to only allow 24 hour internet notice for these backroom meetings, which are legally considered part of the regular agenda IF THEY PRECEDE A REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING. So-called “Special Closed Sessions are never addressed in the Brown Act, although “Special Meetings” are described. For Special Meetings all broadcast and print media are TO HAVE RECEIVED WRITTEN 24 HR. PRIOR NOTICE. I challenge previous poster to show that less than half the regular meetings have had closed sessions. Less closed sessions may have been held, all with inadequate notice, since Teresa Barth came into office in December of 2006. The City owes the citizens an apology and needs to correct its Brown Act Violations by admitting its error and complying with the intent of law, open and transparent government.

Cutting Out The Public wrote on Oct 21, 2007 8:09 PM:A 'special meeting' that immediately preceeds a regular meeting does appear suspect, even if 72 hour notice is given. I have seen separately-noticed special closed-session meetings held 1/2 hour before the regular meeting. Even though 72 hour notice is given for the early special closed session meeting, a person with the regular meeting agenda never has a chance to address the body before the special closed-session meeting because the person did not know to show up 1/2 hour early. This happens all the time in inland North County.

City attorney should follow the law wrote on Oct 22, 2007 6:05 PM:Glenn Sabine, City Attorney for Encinitas is also City Attorney for La Mesa. I called the City Manager's office in La Mesa, and got a current agenda. La Mesa does give 72 hr. notice for closed sessions before its Tuesday Council Meetings. Glenn Sabine still labels them "special," though. On the Encinitas regular agenda, since Barth came into office, one is only now noticed that he or she can speak to Council before it adjourns into private "chambers." These so-called "special closed sessions," begin at 4:30, promptly, even when the Mayor and one council person are not yet present. Deputy Mayor Jerome Stocks calls a quorum. This part of the Council Meeting should be recorded, because it's still public business, except for very limited exceptions, and Council has not yet adjourned behind closed doors.