Wednesday, April 23, 2014

BOS tackles the function and life span of a ‘committee’

From page A1 | February 10, 2014 | 5 Comments

Determining when a committee is no longer a committee should be a relatively simple thing to accomplish. The El Dorado County Board of Supervisors tackled that and several related issues at its Jan. 14 meeting. Prompted by a fairly routine report about the board-appointed Community Economic Development Advisory Committee (CEDAC), Assistant Chief Administrative Officer Kim Kerr figuratively opened up a can of legal, technical and policy worms. High on the pile was the Ralph M. Brown Act, the California law that governs the business of government and public entities.

The Brown Act demands that an agency such as the Board of Supervisors, conduct its business in an open, public forum with a written agenda that is published several days in advance of the scheduled meeting. The law also regulates how, when and under what circumstances public officials, and often their appointees, may meet, what they may and may not talk about and what official actions they may or may not take outside the view of the public.

CEDAC is a lawfully created committee under the Board of Supervisors, and as such is subject to the Brown Act. A subcommittee appointed by CEDAC to deal with specific items or pieces of items, such as Regulatory Reform, is also subject to the Brown Act — unless it’s not. That particular can was kicked around from several opposing perspectives during the Tuesday meeting.

Proponents of keeping the subcommittee “informal” cited its role as a regular Friday morning meeting but without the same participants who attend or don’t depending upon the issues or subjects that may be discussed. No formal agenda precedes the meetings. No recorded minutes are produced and no particular attendee chairs the gathering or controls the conversation. It is an open forum where anyone who wishes to speak is permitted, though it’s assumed that issues will be relevant to the committee’s charge, looking into regulatory reform.

The informality is seen by those proponents as a way to keep interest up and community involvement vibrant. All of those working in or around the committees are volunteers, and “innovation is spurred by people interested in getting something done,” District 4 Supervisor Ron Briggs said, and reminded all that if formalized, “we’ll have to have staff keep minutes (do notices, agendas and the like).” That is, there would be an ongoing expense to the county if the subcommittee were to be brought under the Brown Act.

Some who have been involved cited the “flexibility and freedom” of an ad hoc committee. Kris Payne, a former county employee and current member of the county Historical Society and participant in other community action efforts said, “Everyone brings value and everyone is important, and it’s important to have the back and forth conversation” that is much easier within the ad hoc structure.

Farm Bureau Director Valerie Zentner noted that CEDAC and its subcommittees have made “no attempt to shroud anything. It’s a productive committee and I would hate to clip the wings of any volunteer who (takes part in an) ad hoc committee. I don’t know how you apply the Brown Act to a loose group of dedicated citizens.”

Art Marinaccio, member or former member of numerous county committees such as the Charter Commission and an active participant in development of the general plan described regulatory reform as a crucial vehicle “not to change the General Plan but to implement the General Plan. I’m really concerned with the process of ‘killing growth’ through the Brown Act … You need to be able to make decisions, not to avoid decisions.”

Executive Director of the El Dorado County Chamber of Commerce Laurel Brent-Bumb used even stronger language. “Don’t handcuff the process. Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water,” she warned. Advocate and former director of the Community Economic Development Association of Pollock Pines Jeanne Harper said, “Economic development should be based on what that community wants. I love the Brown Act and it has its place but not on an informal group of people sharing what’s going on in their communities.”

Michael Ranalli and Howard Penn, both candidates for District 4 Supervisor and participants in economic development issues, defended the ad hoc committee process. Ranalli described the Friday meeting as one with “no leaders, just a coordinator whose direction is to implement the General Plan.” Penn said the “ad hoc committee works very well” and questioned “how to keep it informal and inclusive. I’d hate to see it go sideways.”

County Counsel Ed Knapp took some of the “ya” out of the Kumbaya when he pointed out that the Brown Act addressed two groups, “one is a legislative body and two is everybody else,” Knapp said. “Committees formed by government, such as CEDAC, are clearly (subject to the Brown Act). With the regulatory reform committee, the facts are in dispute. Reg. Reform was not a formal appointment by CEDAC … Who is its membership? Is it an ad hoc or a standing committee? Since 2006, it’s been like a standing committee, (and as a) government-sanctioned committee, it follows the government rules.”

Knapp cited the case of Joiner vs the City of Sebastapol as a similar issue regarding the Brown Act and committees established by affected boards of directors. However, he added, “I’m not here to argue whether (the Regulatory Reform Committee) should or should not be subject to the Brown Act.”

Shingle Springs Community Alliance leader and another candidate for District 4 Supervisor Lori Parlin presented a rather different view of the regulatory reform committee from that heard earlier. “(Some community members) fear not being in the room when the ad hoc recommends (something) to CEDAC, who then recommends to you (supervisors). We might miss something important when we’re not in the room. Trust has become a big issue in the past year, and perception equals reality. Regulatory Reform should be covered by the Brown Act.”

Early in the discussion, Kerr praised the CEDAC’s members for the job they have done with respect to the county’s Targeted General Plan Amendment process but noted that “unfortunately it has gotten a negative reputation by people who say they have not been heard or considered.” Kerr also defined the group’s purpose, “to collect information, not to tell communities what they should look like.” She pointed out that four original members of CEDAC, Dale Van Dam, T Abraham, Jim Brunello and Gordon Helm, have opted not to renew their memberships on  the committee.

Lest the advisory group suffer from burnout and attrition, board chair Norma Santiago noted the General Plan process as “an effective means of managing growth … We need to provide a strategy they can work from.”

“Totally,” Kerr interjected. “They want to produce (in accordance with) the General Plan. CEDAC (that is, economic development) won’t go away as an issue.”

Briggs earlier noted the value of CEDAC as part of the effort to cut regulatory “red tape. We need public involvement, (but) do we need all these subcommittees?”

District 1 Supervisor Ron Mikulaco tacked on to that thought, admitting, “I struggle and could not explain what all these entities do.”

Brian Veerkamp, District 3 supervisor, offered a motion to send the decision back to the CEDAC group to determine if it wants its subcommittee to be formally brought under the Brown Act.

“Give direction, get out of the way and let them get it done,” Veerkamp concluded.

The board then voted unanimously to do just that.


Discussion | 5 comments

  • Phil VeerkampFebruary 09, 2014 - 6:42 pm

    Fran, are they talking about you. I think Harper is thinking of you. Play nice, Fran.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Susie O.February 09, 2014 - 7:42 pm

    Okay, let's review the players interviewed here: Art Marinaccio, developer consultant (and not very nice, either); Laurel Brent-Bumb, COC developer cheerleader; Mike Ranalli, business owner; Howard Penn, business owner. The only person looking out for the community, and speaking for the community, is Lori Parlin, community leader. She is not the only community member that attends the Regulatory Reform sub committee meetings and is VERY CONCERNED that the Brown Act has been violated over and over again. INDEED, COUNTY COUNSEL AGREES WITH HER!!!! Those Reg Reform "volunteers" all have agendas in stockpiling the county with rooftops and UPZONING from current General Plan land use and zoning - that is, that vacant field near you that you looked into when you bought your home, that was zoned for 3-acre homes, may be UPZONED to multi-family high-density housing at the whim of the Board of Supervisors after being lobbied by the "business" community (developers and their friends). The community is NOT NO GROWTH - they expect that property owners have the right to develop their land. THEY are AGAINST UPZONING so that developers' projects will "pencil out" and they'll make a good profit. Those "volunteers" mentioned above "volunteer" their hours to Reg Reform to make sure that upzoning is allowed. They are writing the new ordinances for the county. WAKE UP PEOPLE!!! And by the way, Mike Ranalli leads the Reg Reform committee, a staff person regularly attends, and they are developing a powerpoint presentation for the BOS. They meet at a regularly scheduled time at a regularly scheduled place. How about that for Brown Act violations???

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Fran DuchampFebruary 09, 2014 - 8:27 pm

    Phil, "Early in the discussion, Kerr praised the CEDAC’s members for the job they have done with respect to the county’s Targeted General Plan Amendment process but noted that “unfortunately it has gotten a negative reputation by people who say they have not been heard or considered.” <---because it doesnt involve the people. CEDAC is destroying this county...and it is being allowed. Same people ride on a variety of boards --when they want to control something else--they create a new group. None of which has anything to do with the public. Follow the Brown Act--why? They cant even follow the Constitution. They cant even decide on what the "C" means in CEDAC--they have got to realize it is NOT community. I have sat in that BOS room--respecting the government process...watching dancing deer...and fruit instead of any tangible numbers. LUPPU is forecasting. "Forecasting is the process of making statements about events whose actual outcomes (typically) have not yet been observed." The reality is that although people have come into El Dorado--more have left...POPULATION is down. My hope is that when new supervisors are voted in--that the dist representatives for CEDAC are asked to leave and new people are brought into their place for Dist 4 and 5. Or better yet...if LUPPU is ever finished...the whole group is dismantled. Their purpose is over--they got away with the lies...earned their power and brownie points. As for staff--do new supervisors get a "say" in that as well? People must laugh when I say I believe in the government.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • ObservationFebruary 10, 2014 - 7:00 am

    It is certainly interesting that county counsel is unwilling to take a position on whether the Reg Reform group should operate under the Brown Act. Their typically narrow view in protecting county interests would indicate that they do NOT believe there is an issue....... Democracy is a participatory process and the root objections about Reg Reform are not about the process, but the content. Those people with content objections have been creating ballot initiatives, in part, because it is easier to have conversations with like minded people than regularly attend meetings to debate or negotiate. Simply put, their terms, their rules but I am unaware if they actively sought input from individuals with opposing views. Probably not..... The result is the people with content objections are using a vehicle to express their views, but it is a process that takes debate and conversation out of the mix. Now they want to handcuff an informal group with possible content conflicts because of perceived advantage. Ironically, other informal groups exist within the county community in which membership is nebulous and undefined, but the ballot initiatives authors freely use without a formal approval process. In other words, they created the group so they can use the name and imply that thousands of unnamed people agree with them without any verification......When the sun sets on the day it is absolutely about content not process. It is absolutely about the politics of tying the hands of competing views which eliminates any thoughtful discussion. It is absolutely about the disjointed hyperbole built on my opinion is correct so thus your view must be incorrect......Competing perspectives from diverse groups directly lobbying the Board is great and it puts the elected types on the hot seat. It has been working for both sides as no major development project has moved forward and the state mandated 5 yr General Plan update aka LUPPU is moving forward. Sounds like everything is operating as designed from a process perspective even with some warts.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • 1036-FrankFebruary 10, 2014 - 8:20 am

    From my reading of the law, The Brown Act applies if the group has a fixed meeting schedule and a specific purpose and if it does, the group is then required to comply, and these Ad Hoc groups are required to have a specific task and then disband afterward. There appears to be a violation if the group continues meeting on an on-going basis with a regular meeting time and then reporting back to elected officials. Ad Hoc groups and advisory groups should be very closely examined to make sure there is not an attempt to circumvent the law and in this case, disbanding appears overdue or the group must be compliant with the law.

    Reply | Report abusive comment


Downtown group coordinates painting, awnings

By Wendy Schultz | From Page: A1

More mountain lion sightings reported

By Dawn Hodson | From Page: A1, 8 Comments

Supervisor Nutting trial begins

By Cole Mayer | From Page: A1, 76 Comments | Gallery

Sanford murder case to jury

By Cole Mayer | From Page: A1 | Gallery

Herard over the back fence: Try fishing at Wakamatsu

By Bob Billingsley | From Page: B1

Gearing tax questions to correct office saves time

By Treasurer-Tax Collector | From Page: A3



My turn: More than a buzzword

By Special to the Democrat | From Page: A4, 27 Comments

Building restored

By Mountain Democrat | From Page: A4

Outstanding dog

By Mountain Democrat | From Page: A4



‘Parents, be afraid’ letter

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 26 Comments

Ukranian situation

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 5 Comments


By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 10 Comments

Altshuler framing

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 9 Comments

National Day of Prayer

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 3 Comments



Pedal power at the forefront next month

By Jerry Heinzer | From Page: A6 | Gallery

Outside with Charlie: Transitioning

By Charlie Ferris | From Page: A6

Pitching the ‘Root’ cause of Trojans’ victory

By Mike Bush | From Page: A6 | Gallery

Sports Scene: April 22, 2014

By Democrat Staff | From Page: A7

Roundup: April 22, 2014

By Democrat Staff | From Page: A7



4-H’ers star at showcase

By Dawn Hodson | From Page: B1 | Gallery

At a glance: Look for fireballs

By Mimi Escabar | From Page: B2, 1 Comment

Authors to share their stories

By Pat Lakey | From Page: B2, 2 Comments

Church to host human trafficking conference

By Pollock Pines | From Page: B3

Grow For It! Flower of Easter

By Barbara Schuchart | From Page: B5



Crime Log: April 1-3

By Cole Mayer | From Page: A2

Weather stats 4-22-14

By Michael Raffety | From Page: A2

Building permits 4/7-11/2014

By Michael Raffety | From Page: A2



Bobby Lloyd Bridges

By Contributor | From Page: A2

Harry Frank Harper

By Contributor | From Page: A2, 6 Comments

Marion “Wayne” Griswold

By Contributor | From Page: A2


Real Estate



New York Times Crossword

By Contributor | From Page: A8

Flying McCoys

By Contributor | From Page: A8

Speed Bump

By Contributor | From Page: A8


By Contributor | From Page: A8

Horoscope, Thursday, April 24, 2014

By Contributor | From Page: A8

Horoscope, Wednesday, April 23, 2014

By Contributor | From Page: A8

Working It Out

By Contributor | From Page: A8

TV Listings

By Contributor | From Page: A8


By Contributor | From Page: A8


By Contributor | From Page: A8


By Contributor | From Page: A8