Malibu City Attorney Christi Hogin is refuting allegations that members of the City Council violated open meeting laws in preliminary discussions over a controversial park swap, according to a report released Thursday.
At a council meeting set for March 25, Hogin will recommend the City Council “decline to cure and correct” allegations that a majority of the Malibu City Council members spoke to each other about a proposed park swap before information was released to the public.
The community group Malibu Township Council (MTC) sent a letter to the city clerk’s office on Friday last week, alleging city officials violated the state Brown Act’s open meeting requirements in discussions leading up to the Malibu City Council’s Jan. 14 decision to explore swapping Charmlee Wilderness Park to the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy (SMMC) for full control of Malibu Bluffs Park.
The Ralph M. Brown Act guarantees the public’s access to government meetings and prohibits secret meetings of government bodies.
In a scathing report responding to MTC’s allegations, Hogin called the MTC’s claims “baseless” and absurd.
“It does not take much scrutiny to reveal the absurdity of MTC’s position: MTC claims that a majority of council members cannot “know facts” about an item before it is discussed at an open and public meeting. However, the Brown Act prohibits council members from discussing items that are not posted on the agenda of the meeting,” she said in the report. “Because the council members must receive the agenda in advance, all council members wil have “acquired information” about agenda items before they are discussed at meetings.”
The MTC letter, written by attorney and MTC member Frank Angel, charges that Malibu City Councilman John Sibert knew about a meeting between Mayor Lou La Monte, Mayor Pro Tem Joan House and SMMC head Joe Edmiston, and the proposed swap before a Dec. 26 staff report was sent out.
As proof of a Brown Act violation, Angel cites a comment made by Sibert at the Jan. 14 meeting, in which he stated, “I did find out before Christmas that there was a meeting to discuss the swap.”
Sibert knowing about House and La Monte’s meeting with the SMMC did not violate the Brown Act, Hogin writes.
“MTC does not even suggest that council member Sibert discussed the matter with another council member outside the meeting. And he did not,” she states.
The MTC letter demands the City Council suspend all negotiations with SMMC and make all “swap-related public records, including emails and text messages” available to the public. The letter could be the first step to a lawsuit on behalf of MTC against the city if the City Council decides to abide by Hogin’s recommendation to not act on the claims.
To read Hogin’s report in its entirety, download the PDF seen at the left.