This just in from Staff Writer Dan Abendschein:
At Tuesday night’s City Council meeting Councilman Kevin Stapleton spent a few minutes lamenting the fact that we had been so active in covering the DA’s Brown Act violation case against the city while it was an open case, but had not bothered to run an article when the
case was dismissed.
You won’t read that in the newspaper, was the way Stapleton put it, a familiar refrain from this City Council.
Problem is, like so many times in the past when members of the council have made this complaint, we actually did write the story, on December 3 of 2007.
Here it is, For the Record:
COVINA – The district attorney’s office asked the state Attorney
General’s office for an opinion on whether the city was allowed to
make a redevelopment loan in closed session. The city and DA differ
in their interpretations of the Ralph M. Brown Act, which governs how
public meetings are conducted.
The DA’s Public Integrity Division dropped an open-meeting violation
case against Covina last week with the understanding that the
Attorney General would give a clear interpretation of the law.
The case was filed in response to a complaint from Bob Low, a former
Covina mayor and frequent council critic.
The complaint centered around a December 2005 City Council meeting
where the council went into closed session and agreed to issue a
$1.75 million redevelopment loan to a local business.
Both the DA and city agreed the matter was best left to state
authorities.
“This is an equitable and economic solution that will save taxpayers
the money it would cost to try this case,” said Deputy District
Attorney Jennifer Snyder.
Snyder said that her office’s aim was not to punish Covina, but to
establish whether decisions about redevelopment loans can be held in
private.
“The ultimate outcome is what we want: either a decision that
vindicates us, or clear reasons why our interpretation is off,”
Snyder said. “We’re confident our interpretation is solid.”
Paul Phillips, Covina city manager, said the dismissal of the
complaint was an exoneration of the city.
“I think it proves we were clearly following the law as we understood
it,” Phillips said.
The dismissal ensures that the city will not face any penalty, no
matter what opinion the Attorney General’s office issues, Snyder
said. She added that the opinion will likely not come out of the
office for at least six months.
Covina’s attorneys had maintained that there were entitled to meet in
closed-session under a Brown Act exemption for real-estate price
negotiations.
But Snyder argued that the 2005 loan to Bert’s Mega Mall, a
motorcycle and watercraft business on Azusa Avenue, did not involve
the “purchase, sale, exchange, or lease of real property,” which are
the activities the Brown Act allows for closed-session real-estate
negotiations.
Snyder noted the city rescinded the action and re-made the loan in
open-session, which was a factor in the office’s reasoning in
dropping the case
