Brown Act Violations

Now I've said "Brown Act Violations" which refers to "the Brown act" which states the laws concerning local boards such as the KVHD board. I'm going to give you a few excerpts of what the Act is about, then give you the link where you can read and save the whole document. Then you can read the excerpt below with more understanding of the severity of it in terms of how boards and members should conduct business.

54950. Policy declaration

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’sbusiness. 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.

http://caag.state.ca.us/publications/2003_Main_BrownAct.pdf

Here is correspondence which can be verified from my server or harddrive of my computer. It is also been saved to disc. Copies went to the District attorney.

I will not tell you who it is from at this time and I have edited it. The person who wrote this as well as the person mentioned, are violating both the Brown Act as well as executive information.

Bob Jamison was elected to the office of First Vice President, which was his desire, so he could Chair Board Meetings if Brad had to be absent. Bob Jamison chose to not have the Board Meeting on Thursday as he was afraid that everything would be a 2 to 2 vote without a third positive vote from Brad who is Chair, and the third person to vote for anything positive.

All of this is “off the record”---…you cannot use any of this until after a statement is made by Pam regarding xxxxx's actions….probably will be after the Board Meeting—when ever that will be….Know this—If I was acting as First VP or Chair, I would have carried out meeting on schedule, I would have only tabled the action mentioned before the meeting—that could have been accomplished by a telephone vote of all Board Members—

This person is referring to the board meeting which was cancelled in April of 2007, because the majority was not present and the vote could have gone either way. That's what they wanted to avoid so they made several excuses for putting off the meeting. You can verify this as meetings are the first thursday of the month, and this one didn't take off until the 26th. (the letter was from former board member, Barbara Casas)

The Brown Act:

54952.2. Definition of meeting

(a) As used in this chapter, “meeting” includes any congregation of a majority of themembers of a legislative body at the same time and place to hear, discuss, or deliberate upon any itemthat is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the legislative body or the local agency to which itpertains.

(b) Except as authorized pursuant to Section 54953, any use of direct communication,personal intermediaries, or technological devices that is employed by a majority of the members of thelegislative body to develop a collective concurrence as to action to be taken on an item by the members of the legislative body is prohibited.

CRIMINAL SANCTIONS:

The district attorney may seek misdemeanor penalties against

a member of a body who attends a meeting where action is

taken in violation of the Act, and where the member intended

to deprive the public of information which the member knew

or has reason to know the public was entitled to receive.

54959