Brown Act law best used responsibly

Among the laws that journalists hold most dear are those

regulating government action and forcing most, though not all,

decision-making to be done well out in the public’s eye. These laws

vary from state to state, some being much friendlier to government

watchdogs than others.

In California, the open meeting law is known as the Brown Act and,

like most rules, is long and detailed, and sometimes even a bit

confusing. Thankfully, it is rare that any public official or agency

is found in violation of the law. It is not that rare, however, for

Brown Act charges to be raised.

And that is good and bad.

It is good because this law serves no purpose if there are not

eyes watching our local, county and state officials. Lawmakers need

to know that if they decide to cut a backroom deal, there will be

consequences. They serve the public and must be held accountable to

it.

But it is bad when the charges that are brought seem, from the

outset, to fall far short of the scope of the act, which is quite

precise and pointed. In these cases, the Brown Act often seems just a

political or newsmaking tool. With each of these cases, it loses its

gravity and importance.

Recently, the Orange County district attorney’s office dropped two

charges against the Newport Beach City Council related to the Brown

Act. One involved the hiring of lobbyists to help with the John Wayne

Airport Settlement Agreement and the other a meeting in which a

development agreement for the expansion of the Koll Center office

complex was hammered out.

These complaints, filed by the leaders of the Greenlight

Committee, were on that uncomfortable border between legitimate

questions about government activity and misuse of the intent of the

open meetings law.

Though they never quite sounded like true violations, there is no

reason to think that Greenlight’s leaders were abusing the law in any

way. It does illustrate, however, another potential consequence of

bringing the Brown Act up too often.

A version of the “boy who cried wolf” tale, it reads like this: If

watchdogs begin to bark too often, when their bark actually has a

bite to it, no one will be listening any longer.

And that would be unfortunate, for agree or disagree with

Greenlight’s intentions, there is nothing wrong with having a group

keeping tabs on City Hall.