pages: OpenGovernmentCommission/2021-03-01.pdf, 14
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
OpenGovernmentCommission | 2021-03-01 | 14 | decision if a complainant comes to the OGC and seeks a remedy beyond what they received, such that they proceed with a private right of action; further inquired whether a Commission decision would become evidence in that type of litigation; stated knowing what the record could be used for would be helpful before deliberating. The Chief Assistant City Attorney responded after tonight's hearing, if either party is displeased with the results and wants to pursue appeal remedies, that party would have the right to file a private right of action as a private lawsuit; the record that is created tonight would all become part of the underlying record; a reviewing Court would look at all of the evidence put before the OGC to determine whether or not the evidence used met the legal standard of the decision made by the OGC. In response to Mr. Foreman's request to comment, the City Clerk stated the process that the complainant gets to present their case; the only other time the complainant should speak is if a Commissioner asks them a specific question. Commissioner LoPilato inquired whether the OGC would be able to issue an oral tentative decision tonight with the opportunity for further clarification for finalization of the written decision; asked for clarification about the draft decision attached to the agenda. The Chief Assistant City Attorney responded the draft decision was generated and prepared by Mr. Harrison on behalf of the City in the capacity as an advocate for one side or the other; it was prepared by one side with the hopes that the Commission would reach that decision, although not obligated to do so; the OGC can reach some aspects of the decision if not the entire thing; to address the first question, pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance, the OGC could reach an oral or written decision tonight; if an oral decision is made, there is 30 days to capture it into a written decision; she advises that whatever oral decision is reached, it needs to be complete; the OGC should not make a partial decision tonight and plan to add to it afterwards. The City Clerk stated that the practice has been that every time the OGC made a decision, it was completed during the meeting; only one time was there direction for staff to come back with more information; the written decision could be executed after without violating the Brown Act. Commissioner Chen inquired what is within the purview of the OGC and whether the ARPD violated the Sunshine Ordinance when they established the subcommittee; since the Ordinance was changed to exempt ad hoc committees, it seems like, according to the Sunshine Ordinance at the time the ARPD decision was made, they were not de facto violating the Sunshine Ordinance; although there is a gray area in her mind whether they violated the Brown Act. Chair Tilos stated Commissioner discussion will take place after clarifying questions and public comment. Commissioner LoPilato thanked Mr. Foreman for being here and sharing the information Meeting of the Open Government Commission March 1, 2021 14 | OpenGovernmentCommission/2021-03-01.pdf |