Letter to readers
In our April 14 issue, The Sun published a letter purported to be from a resident of La Canada who ran in Run Seal Beach. Although it is our policy to confirm all letters through a phone call, this practice has not been followed consistantly. We take full responsibility for that internal failure. It turns out that the letter was a hoax, and no such name was registered for the Run. We are sorry this occurred and have practices in place to ensure it never happens again. Our credibility in the community is paramount to us and this is a heartfelt apology to our readers and the residents of Seal Beach.
— Dixie Redfearn, editor
Understanding the Brown Act
I write to encourage a dialog rather than an ongoing, polarized argument about the Brown Act and what it means. Having spent more than a decade investigating and prosecuting public integrity crimes, I understand the suspicions that community members harbor and I appreciate the difficulties that public officials face when, despite their best efforts, the decision making process is challenged. What I know without question is that the law in California seeks to protect both sides, but in so doing, it cannot and does not spell out answers for every question or situation that may arise. Those dilemmas are typically resolved either by an Attorney General opinion, or by resort to the assistance of the courts by means of a process that includes lawsuits. That process is good. It’s critical to the utility and protection of the law.
I also am very familiar with the work of Californians Aware, which is run by Terry Francke, an attorney who is well versed in all manner of government law and the open meeting statutes. Over the years he and I have had many discussions about the law, and we often have different views. Sometimes those differences have resulted in the filing of lawsuits, so that a judge can make the call. That’s an integral part of our governance.
Lawsuits are not always evil. Lawsuits are emotionally challenging and sometimes expensive, but the fact is, the law cannot evolve without resort to court rulings, and court rulings do not occur unless there is a lawsuit. Court opinions provide guidance for future questions, and are an integral part of our governance.
Californians Aware is a good group. They do good work. So do other attorneys that file Brown Act lawsuits. They are not outsiders. They are activists that help all of us have a better grasp on what the law requires and they remind us of the value of testing our actions against the letter and spirit of the law.
In truth, there are no outsiders when it comes to the Brown Act. Everyone has a right to be present, and the Brown Act seeks to level the playing field for residents and public officials alike. The very purpose of the Brown Act is to balance the public’s right to be present and participate in the decision making process while at the same time affording the legislative body (in this case, the City of Seal Beach) the same protections that a person would have, namely, the right to consult freely with an attorney outside the public view to know what the options are before or during a potential lawsuit, the right to negotiate for the sale, lease or other conveyance of real property outside the public view so that the legislative body gets the best possible deal, the right to discuss personnel matters that, as a matter of law, are subject to confidentiality, and the right to discuss matters of significant public safety threats so that appropriate measures can be taken to prevent harm to the public. These subjects are expressly set forth in the Brown Act as the closed session exceptions, and the exceptions are there for very good reasons.
I have the benefit of having wrestled with the Brown Act for many years. It is not the easiest or clearest series of laws on the books, but nearly all conflicts can be resolved by recalling its purpose. In enacting this chapter, the Legislature finds and declares that the public commissions, boards and councils and the other public agencies in this State exist to aid in the conduct of the people’s business. It is the intent of the law that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly.
The people of this State do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created.(emphasis added)
Knowing what the law is (and isn’t) is incredibly valuable. It requires some thought, and consideration of what the law seeks to accomplish. In my view, the Brown Act is not issue-specific. It is process-specific.
I firmly believe that if there was better understanding of what the rules are, and why, everyone would benefit. I therefore call on the city leaders to consider holding a Brown Act Forum that includes a panel discussion about the issues that have come up so that we can, as a community with both leaders and residents, have a reasonable discussion about what the law is and what it seeks to accomplish. I understand the challenges that this kind of session can present, but with the appropriate public notice, and established limitations then everyone can participate. The “them against us” mentality just doesn’t accomplish anything. Let’s forge a more collaborative approach for the future of our wonderful town. It’s worked in other cities; I have every confidence it can work in ours too.
Jennifer Lentz Snyder
Seal Beach
Guest Pass confiscated at Leisure World gate
At about 2 p.m. yesterday, (April 16, 2016) one of my four 2016 issued Golden Rain Foundation Guest Passes was confiscated by Leisure World Security at the main gate, stating that there is an arrest warrant for Mr. Ballard. Seal Beach Police were called. Seal Beach Police stated there is no warrant, but LW Security insists there is. . . and the two police officers escorted Mr. Paul Ballard off the “private property” with video recorded threats of his arrest for trespassing if he returns. I had given Mr. Ballard the Guest Pass, and was expecting his arrival.
Neither Leisure World Security or Seal Beach Police have contacted me about refusing to allow Mr. Ballard entrance, or about my Guest Pass being confiscated. This is shameful treatment of Leisure World residents, Mr. Ballard and guests by Leisure World Security and Seal Beach Police and there is simply no excuse for it. I demand my confiscated Guest Pass be returned to me or Mr. Ballard, or replaced with a new one without incurring any additional fees by April 20, 2016.
Fay Chew
(Fmr. M3 Board of Director)
Leisure World
The opinions expressed in Letters to the Editor are not necessarily those of the Sun. The Sun welcomes Letters to the Editor. Letters should be 300 words maximum.
Letters should be e-mailed, signed by the author and include the author’s address and phone number (the latter two are for verification, not publication).
The Sun reserves the right to accept, edit, or reject letters for any reason. Unless otherwise indicated, all letters sent to the Sun are understood to be intended for publication.
E-mail letters to: editor@sunnews.org.
