Morgan Hill mayor denies violating Brown Act

A citizen accused the Morgan Hill mayor of violating California’s open meeting law when the mayor refused to allow him to speak during a recent city council meeting. The mayor said the man couldn’t speak because he did not fill out a speaker card and give it to the clerk at the start of the meeting. -db

Morgan Hill Times
August 3, 2010
By Michael Moore

Morgan Hill Mayor Steve Tate said he did not violate the Brown Act when he declined to let an audience member speak at a recent city council meeting.

The audience member – Morgan Hill resident Art College – claimed at the following meeting that the mayor’s refusal to let him speak during a “public hearing” portion of the July 21 meeting was in violation of the state’s opening meetings law as well as the city’s policy.

College, who has since announced his intention to run for Tate’s mayoral seat, said at that meeting he raised his hand to speak in response to an item on the meeting agenda that related to the Santa Clara County weed abatement program.

However, Tate told him because he did not fill out a yellow “speaker card” and hand it to the clerk at the beginning of the public hearing, that he could not speak.

Such a requirement is unlawful according to state laws that allow all citizens the chance to speak or otherwise present information at city council meetings, as well as laws that protect the anonymity of those who wish to speak, College said. He cited the state law that says providing personal information is voluntary.

“No attendant at a city council meeting can be denied the right to speak on any issue before the city council on the grounds that they must first fill out a speaker card to approach the podium and speak,” College said during the public comment portion of the July 28 council meeting.

The city has 30 days, from the time College’s complaint was made, to respond or correct the open meetings violation, College noted.

Copyright 2010 Morgan Hill Times

One Comment

  • I have run into this before in Santa Rosa and I managed to get it changed by pointing out that the Court Case referred to as establishing case, did not, in fact, make any such ruling.
    Now if I could just find the court case!

Comments are closed.