Hiding Behind Mr. Brown: Using Transparency Laws to Avoid Accountability

“Stop talkin’ so much, listen.”

- Hyro the Hero, “We Ain’t Afraid”

If the governing board of El Camino Real Charter High School was trying to limit participation by its constituents by scheduling its meeting in the middle of the school day, then that effort failed. Concerned by the sudden departure of former Executive Director David Hussey, 12 members of the public signed up to address the board. They then waited for their two-minute turn at the microphone.

As the meeting began, the presiding officer reminded the speakers who had signed up of the ground rules. This included a statement that the board was not allowed to respond or engage with them. They were told that this was due to prohibitions set out in the Brown Act, the California law meant to ensure that government agencies conduct business in full view of the public.

The rules outlined in the Brown Act were misapplied as the officer cited them. The Act does require that agendas for public meetings be posted in advance. Depending on the meeting type (regular, special, or emergency), this posting must be made at least 72, 24, or 1 hour before the meeting starts.

In limiting discussion, El Camino was relying on the rule that states that only items listed in the posted agenda can be included in the proceedings. Therefore, when a subject is raised during public comment and is not on the agenda, it cannot be discussed by the public body, either among board members or in dialogue with the speaker. This is to ensure that other members of the public can make an informed decision to attend the meeting if a subject important to them would be included in the proceedings.

While many charter schools are often criticized for ignoring the rules, in this case, the presiding officer was enforcing a rule that did not apply to the meeting.

Since this was designated as a "special meeting," the Brown Act did not require a general comment period where members of the public could talk about any subject affecting the school or its management. To the detriment of accountability, the board chose to take advantage of this provision, and the public was limited to commenting only on items that appeared on the agenda.

A decision was also made by the presiding officer to assertively enforce this rule. Throughout the meeting, he interrupted speakers the moment he felt they had strayed from the confines of the agenda, prompting complaints from those attending the meeting. Often, it seemed that he did so without knowing where the speaker was headed. Some points require background information, and it may not be immediately apparent how these will connect until the tie-in occurs.

With only agenda items being discussed, every comment offered could have been taken up by the board. In fact, time limits could have been jettisoned, and board members could have had actual conversations with the constituents they are supposed to represent. Nothing in the Brown Act would have prevented this.

As Chair of the Northridge East Neighborhood Council's Education Committee, this is how I ran my meetings. Unless I had to impose more formality to prevent disruptions, every participant was allowed to speak and build on what previous speakers had said. This created a collaborative atmosphere that was conducive to productive problem-solving.

The Brown Act is meant to protect the public by ensuring their ability to participate in the process of government. It is unfortunate when the law is effectively used to inhibit that participation. El Camino’s actions during the meeting on the termination of the Executive Director may not have violated the letter of the law, but the board clearly did not align with its intention to ensure the public remains part of public meetings.

“Fist raised, we ain’t afraid,

‘Cause there’s power when the people come together.”

- Hyro the Hero

Carl Petersen is a former Green Party candidate for the LAUSD School Board and a longtime advocate for public education and special needs families. Now based in Washington State, he writes about politics, culture, and their intersections at TheDifrntDrmr.