All Department/District Heads

At its meeting held April 2, 2002, the Board took the following action:

94

The following items were called up for consideration:

1. Discussion of the County's compliance with California's open meeting and public records laws and report from County Counsel, Executive Officer of the Board and the Chief Administrative Officer concerning policies and procedures for complying with these laws, and invitation for public comment, as requested by Supervisor Yaroslavsky at the meeting of March 19, 2002;

2. Report by County Counsel, the Auditor-Controller and the Chief Administrative Officer on the development of a Countywide protocol for appropriately responding to Public Records Act requests, with the Office of County Counsel as the department ultimately responsible for the protocol, advising on issues of the presence or absence of confidentiality or privilege relating to the documents in question; and upon adoption of the proposed protocol, place the definitions, guidelines and steps outlining the request on the County's Internet web page, as requested by Supervisor Burke at the meeting of March 19, 2002;

(Continued on Page 2)

- 1 -

Syn. 94 (Continued)

3. Consideration of the following, as requested by Supervisor Molina at the meeting of March 26, 2002:

a. Report by the Chief Administrative Officer, County Counsel and Executive Officer of the Board on their review of the "Sunshine Act" submitted by the Los Angeles Sunshine Coalition, in conjunction with the Coalition as well as other experts or advocates, concerning the First Amendment and open government, and recommendations concerning which portions of the Sunshine Act should be adopted, which portions should be rejected, and any further recommendations about implementing a Sunshine Act for the County;

b. Consideration of the Executive Officer of the Board's amendment to the Board's Closed Session Procedures to require minute books of closed session meetings to contain tape recordings of the closed sessions in compliance with Government Code Section 54957.2, in addition to a written listing of actions taken; and

c. Report and recommendations by the Chief Administrative Officer, County Counsel, Executive Officer of the Board and Interim Children's Services Inspector General on how Children's Services Inspector General reports may be submitted to the Board in full compliance with the Ralph M. Brown Act;

4. Report by County Counsel, in conjunction with the Chief Administrative Officer, on their review of all previous legal findings by County Counsel interpreting how the Ralph M. Brown Act applies to Deputy meetings and meetings with County department staff, including final legal findings and recommendations on how to ensure continued compliance with the law, as requested by Supervisors Knabe and Molina at the meeting of March 26, 2002.

(Continued on Page 3)

- 2 -

Syn. 94 (Continued)

The following statement was entered into the record for Supervisor Yaroslavsky:

"The Board has scheduled a special order of business at its meeting of April 2, 2002 in order to discuss Los Angeles County's adherence to the Ralph M. Brown Act, the California Public Records Act, and the principles of open government. County staff has been asked to make presentations and the public has been invited to present its views.

"I would like to place before the public for its consideration, and before the Board for its approval at the conclusion of the April 2nd meeting, a series of measures that will greatly improve the ability of the public to access information about the workings of County government and to influence County decisions and policies. It is my hope and firm expectation that at the conclusion of the meeting, the Board will not only adopt these measures, but also take other action in response to issues raised at the meeting by members of the public and by County staff.

" I therefore recommend that the Board take the following actions:

1. Instruct the Chief Administrative Officer and County Counsel to prepare amendments to County policy to provide that meetings of Board deputies, called to discuss matters which have been calendared for Board of Supervisors action, be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act, regardless of whether or not such meetings are covered by the Ralph M. Brown Act;

2. Instruct the Executive Officer of the Board to post on the County's web page all documents that are part of the official transmittal of any Board agenda item as soon as they are available, including not only the Board letters which are already posted but also departmental backup materials that are part of the official file;

(Continued on Page 4)

- 3 -

Syn. 94 (Continued)

3. Instruct the Chief Administrative Officer to arrange for the posting of complete, proofread transcripts of Board of Supervisors' meetings on the Board's web page, with hyperlinks to related items accompanying the transcript, if possible (the County's current contractor for Board telecasts is prepared to place a fully proofed transcript and accompanying streaming video of Board meetings online within 24 hours of a meeting at a cost of $750 per meeting), and instruct the Chief Administrative Officer to ensure that a mechanism is put into place to ensure that, insofar as possible, names of individuals, organizations and agencies are presented and spelled correctly;

4. Instruct each Department Head to adopt a policy for releasing official documents to the public which is similar to the existing policy of the Chief Administrative Officer, which makes Board letters and Board memoranda available to the public immediately upon release, both at the Chief Administrative Officer's Public Information Office at the Hall of Administration and on the Chief Administrative Officer's web page; and instruct each Department Head to report back to the Board within four weeks on their compliance with this policy;

5. Instruct the Executive Officer of the Board, the Chief Administrative Officer and County Counsel to prepare the necessary documents to renew for another 10 years, the Board's policy explicitly directing Departments to expeditiously honor press requests, and to post that policy on the County's public website; also instruct the Chief Administrative Officer to conduct annual seminars on this policy with all Department Heads to ensure that they remain fully informed of its contents and up to date on the continuing importance and priority that the Board has placed on this policy;

6. Instruct the Executive Officer of the Board and County Counsel, in order to avoid violations of the Ralph M. Brown Act by County Commissions, to prepare materials and conduct annual seminars for staff of all County bodies that operate under the Brown Act, including Commissions, Committees and Task Forces, and for the Chairpersons of each such body to ensure that they adhere to all provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act; and

(Continued on Page 5)

- 4 -

Syn. 94 (Continued)

7. Instruct the Chief Administrative Officer and County Counsel to prepare amendments to County policy to provide that no department head, employee or consultant shall be required to obey any directive from the Board of Supervisors that would violate any provision of Federal, State or local law in pursuit of any County objective; and to provide that this policy may be used by any department head, employee or consultant as a defense against disciplinary action imposed for refusing to follow such a directive."

The following statement was entered into the record for Supervisors Molina and Knabe:

"The Board set aside time on Tuesday, April 2, 2002 for the public to comment on the County's compliance with the Brown Act and to address related concerns about the County not conducting business in an open manner. In addition, several motions filed by Supervisors are scheduled to be heard that seek to investigate or change the manner in which the Board conducts business.

"As one example, Chairman Yaroslavsky has proposed that Board deputies conduct calendared meetings in accordance with the Brown Act and that no person shall be required to obey any directive from the Board that would violate any law.

"As a second example, the Los Angeles Sunshine Coalition has proposed that the Board adopt a `Sunshine Act' drafted by the Coalition to strengthen the County's commitment to open government.

"As a third example, Supervisor Knabe and I have asked County Counsel to reconcile past, inconsistent opinions concerning whether deputy meetings are subject to the Brown Act.

"Because such proposals involve complex legal issues, it is imperative that an attorney with appropriate expertise analyze them and provide recommendations to the Board. It is also imperative that the Board be provided with ongoing advice to ensure that the Board complies with open government laws consistently, in an informed manner, and long after the current issues fade from the press headlines.

(Continued on Page 6)

- 5 -

Syn. 94 (Continued)

"Although County Counsel is currently responsible for these tasks, because of recent events, the Board should obtain independent, special counsel to analyze these issues and provide objective, clear recommendations, with one primary goal in mind: to fully comply with open government laws and meet the County's obligations to the public. Independent special counsel, with expertise with the Brown Act, open government and related laws, is needed given County Counsel's direct involvement in the events that precipitated criticism of the Board.

"We therefore recommend that the Board retain outside counsel to analyze all proposals considered by the Board and raised by the public regarding the aforementioned proposals relating to open government laws and provide recommendations to the Board within three weeks on how to implement the proposals.

"We further recommend that outside counsel advise the Board on these issues on an ongoing basis for an initial period of at least six months."

The following statement was entered into the record for Supervisor Burke:

"In accordance with the spirit of the Brown Act, I recommend that the Board of Supervisors adopt a strictly enforced policy in accordance with the spirit of the Brown Act, that henceforth, any Board office or County Department initiated amendment to an agendized motion or Department recommendation shall be posted and publicly distributed at least twenty-four (24) hours in advance of the meeting."

Donovan M. Main, Senior Assistant County Counsel, made a verbal presentation of the following attached reports dated March 28, 2002, regarding:

1. The County's compliance with the Public Records Act and the Ralph M. Brown Act (Recommendation No. 1);

2. The Sunshine Act (Supervisor Molina's Recommendation No. 3 [a]);

3. How Children's Services Inspector General reports may be submitted to the Board in full compliance with the Ralph M. Brown Act (Supervisor Molina's Recommendation No. 3 [c]); and

(Continued on Page 7)

- 6 -

Syn. 94 (Continued)

4. How the Ralph M. Brown Act applies to Deputy meetings and meetings with County department staff. (Recommendation No. 4)

Patt Morrison representing the Los Angeles Press Club, Richard McKee representing the California First Amendment Coalition, Tom Clanin, Cheryl Romo, Karen Ocamb, Barbara Blinderman representing the Sunshine Coalition, and other interested persons responded to the Board's invitation for public comment.

The following statement was entered into the record for Supervisors Knabe and Molina:

"As made clear by the recommendations presented by the Board today concerning open government, and its decision to hold public hearings today on those issues, the Board is fully committed to analyzing its current way of doing business and making changes necessary to increase its openness to the public. To continue its commitment to these issues, the Board should adopt proposals that are ready for adoption, and continue to analyze the remaining proposals in a meaningful way.

"In a motion filed by Supervisor Molina and I, we requested that proposals presented at the Board meeting today concerning open government be reviewed by independent counsel. The Board has retained J. Kenneth Brown, of Brown Winfield & Canzoneri, to represent it in relation to allegations made against the Board concerning Brown Act violations. If Mr. Brown is willing, his firm could further advise the Board concerning proposals made by Board members or the public to make County government more open.

"All of the proposals for today's meeting now have been presented to the Board. Some of the proposals appear to be straightforward and should be acted on immediately. Others involve complex legal and policy issues, and should be considered thoroughly before any action is taken. The record should be made clear as to what matters have been voted on today, and what matters should be considered further."

(Continued on Page 8)

- 7 -

Syn. 94 (Continued)

After discussion, Supervisor Knabe made a motion that the Board take the following actions:

1. Adopt the proposed amendment to the Board's Closed Session Procedures, requiring that Closed Session meetings be tape recorded (Supervisor Molina's aforementioned Recommendation No. 3 (b);

2. Instruct County Counsel to no longer place the Children's Inspector General's reports in Closed Session, so that any administrative and policy matters related to these confidential written reports will be placed on the regular agenda, by motion of any Board Member, and discussed in public;

3. Adopt Supervisor Yaroslavsky's aforementioned Recommendation Nos. 2 through 6;

4. Adopt County Counsel's attached proposed protocol dated March 28, 2002, in response to Supervisor Burke's motion dated March 19, 2002, regarding public records requests (aforementioned Recommendation No. 2); and

5. Adopt Supervisors Molina and Knabe's recommendation to retain independent counsel, Brown Winfield & Canzoneri, to review other proposals regarding open government at the Board's discretion, and to advise the Board on issues related to open government for at least six months, with review to include, but not be limited to (Recommendation No 6):

a. The proposed Sunshine Act, submitted by the Los Angeles Sunshine Coalition;

b. Any options to strengthen the Public Records Act Protocol, prepared by County Counsel;

c. The proposals set forth in Recommendation Numbers 1 and 7 of Supervisor Yaroslavsky's aforementioned recommendation;

(Continued on Page 9)

- 8 -

Syn. 94 (Continued)

d. A protocol to ensure that Board agenda descriptions for Closed Sessions are more descriptive and informative; and

e. A protocol for announcing Board actions taken in Closed Session.

Supervisor Yaroslavsky made a suggestion that Supervisor Knabe's motion be amended to adopt as Board policy the provision that meetings of Board deputies, called to discuss matters which have been calendared for Board of Supervisors action, be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act, regardless of whether or not such meetings are covered by the Ralph M. Brown Act. Supervisor Knabe accepted Supervisor Yaroslavsky's amendment. (Supervisor Yaroslavsky's Recommendation No. 1 revised)

Supervisor Burke made a suggestion that Supervisor Knabe's motion be amended to also request the independent counsel to review whether subcommittees created by Commissions, Committees and Task Forces established by the Board are subject to the Brown Act. Supervisor Knabe accepted Supervisor Burke's amendment.

Supervisor Burke also requested the Chief Administrative Officer to report back to the Board on the budget allocation/costs for use of outside counsel.

Supervisor Yaroslavsky made the following suggestions:

1. Recommendation No. 3 of his aforementioned recommendations be amended to read:

Instruct the Executive Officer of the Board, to work in conjunction with the Director of Internal Services and Chief Administrative Office's Director of Public Affairs, to establish a cost estimate within four weeks on implementation of a project that would put an official transcript and corresponding video segments of Board meetings online, with both linked to the Statement of Proceedings that is already posted on the Internet, with the goal of the project to have the transcript online within 24 hours after each Board meeting, with estimate to include the cost of weekly preparation of the transcript, development of links to the video and transcripts, a server to handle the videos. disk space, new search screens, monthly operation of Web servers, communication lines, and any other associated costs; and

(Continued on Page 10)

- 9 -

Syn. 94 (Continued)

2. Recommendation No. 7 of his aforementioned recommendations relating to a policy that states in part that no subordinate violate any provision of the law, be referred to County Counsel and the independent counsel for review and report back.

The following statement was entered into the record for Supervisor Yaroslavsky:

"From time to time, our Board has received complaints that weekly Board meetings are too difficult to follow, that items are taken up and voted on too quickly, that proceedings are difficult to hear, that final actions may even be impossible to understand.

"While I do not believe this confusion is deliberate, there is no question that some improvements in the parliamentary conduct of our Board meetings can and should be made in the interests of clarifying and demystifying our proceedings to enhance the public's ability to understand and participate in our proceedings.

"One problem arises, for example, when due to a combination of poor Boardroom acoustics, the level of activity on the dais, and the absence of a clearly-defined protocol for casting votes, results of the Board votes are too often obscure. A clearly delivered uniform announcement would eliminate the confusion and signal when the Board was proceeding to take up the next item. In order to ensure continuity and a seamless transition between Board chairs from year to year, the new item should be announced according to standard protocol by the Executive Officer of the Board.

"There is also a significant public perception problem with Closed Sessions owing to the lack of a more complete public explanation of why the Board is legally authorized and has chosen to hold such discussions out of the public view. Citing legal code sections is not enough; County Counsel should provide a layman's explanation.

"Besides allaying public concerns, and offers the additional benefit of calling upon County Counsel to remain vigilant in screening requests for appropriate referral to Closed Session."

(Continued on Page 11)

- 10 -

Syn. 94 (Continued)

Therefore, Supervisor Yaroslavsky made a motion that the Board instruct the County Counsel to draft amendments to the Rules of the Board altering meeting procedures to:

1. Report the roll-call vote of each nonconsent agenda item after it is taken, calling out the agenda number and identifying Board members who cast ayes, nays, and abstentions;

2. Provide a fuller explanation, in clearly understandable layperson's terms, of the legal basis for going into Closed Sessions; and

3. Require the announcement of actions taken during closed-door sessions, not only in the Statement of Proceedings, but also at the next Board meeting and in writing (including e-mail) to all those who have requested such notifications.

Supervisor Antonovich made a suggestion that Supervisor Yaroslavsky's motion be amended to instruct the Executive Officer of the Board to place the tabulation of votes on the video tape with the names showing. Supervisor Yaroslavsky accepted Supervisor Antonovich's amendment.

After discussion, on motion of Supervisor Knabe, seconded by Supervisor Molina, duly carried by the following vote: Ayes: Supervisors Molina, Burke, Knabe, Antonovich and Yaroslavsky; Noes: None, the Board took the following actions:

1. Adopted the proposed amendment to the Board's Closed Session Procedures, requiring that Closed Session meetings be tape recorded (Supervisor Molina's aforementioned Recommendation No. 3 (b);

2. Instructed County Counsel to no longer place the Children's Inspector General's reports in Closed Session, so that any administrative and policy matters related to these confidential written reports will be placed on the regular agenda, by motion of any Board Member, and discussed in public;

(Continued on Page 12)

- 11 -

Syn. 94 (Continued)

3. Instructed the Executive Officer of the Board to post on the County's web page all documents that are part of the official transmittal of any Board agenda item as soon as they are available, including not only the Board letters which are already posted but also departmental backup materials that are part of the official file;

4. Instructed the Executive Officer of the Board, to work in conjunction with the Director of Internal Services and Chief Administrative Office's Director of Public Affairs, to establish a cost estimate within four weeks on implementation of a project that would put an official transcript and corresponding video segments of Board meetings online, with both linked to the Statement of Proceedings that is already posted on the Internet, with the goal of the project to have the transcript online within 24 hours after each Board meeting, with estimate to include the cost of weekly preparation of the transcript, development of links to the video and transcripts, a server to handle the videos. disk space, new search screens, monthly operation of Web servers, communication lines, and any other associated costs; (Supervisor Yaroslavsky's revised Recommendation No. 3)

5. Instructed each Department Head to adopt a policy for releasing official documents to the public which is similar to the existing policy of the Chief Administrative Officer, which makes Board letters and Board memoranda available to the public immediately upon release, both at the Chief Administrative Officer's Public Information Office at the Hall of Administration and on the Chief Administrative Officer's web page; and instructed each Department Head to report back to the Board within four weeks on their compliance with this policy;

6. Instructed the Executive Officer of the Board, the Chief Administrative Officer and County Counsel to prepare the necessary documents to renew for another 10 years, the Board's policy explicitly directing Departments to expeditiously honor press requests, and to post that policy on the County's public website; and instructed the Chief Administrative Officer to conduct annual seminars on this policy with all Department Heads to ensure that they remain fully informed of its contents and up to date on the continuing importance and priority that the Board has placed on this policy;

(Continued on Page 13)

- 12 -

Syn. 94 (Continued)

7. Instructed the Executive Officer of the Board and County Counsel, in order to avoid violations of the Ralph M. Brown Act by County Commissions, to prepare materials and conduct annual seminars for staff of all County bodies that operate under the Brown Act, including Commissions, Committees and Task Forces, and for the Chairpersons of each such body to ensure that they adhere to all provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act;

8. Adopted the County Counsel's attached proposed protocol dated March 28, 2002, in response to Supervisor Burke's motion dated March 19, 2002, regarding Public Records Acts requests (Aforementioned Recommendation No. 2);

9. Agreed to retain independent counsel, Brown Winfield & Canzoneri, to review other proposals regarding open government at the Board's discretion, and to advise the Board on issues related to open government for at least six months, with review to include, but not be limited to (Recommendation No 6):

a. The proposed Sunshine Act, submitted by the Los Angeles Sunshine Coalition;

b. Any options to strengthen the Public Records Act Protocol, prepared by County Counsel;

c. A protocol to ensure that Board agenda descriptions for Closed Sessions are more descriptive and informative;

d. A protocol for announcing Board actions taken in Closed Session; and

e. Review if subcommittees created by Commissions, Committees and Task Forces established by the Board are subject to the Brown Act; (Burke's Amendment)

10. Adopted as Board policy the provision that meetings of Board deputies, called to discuss matters that have been calendared for Board of Supervisors action, be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act, regardless of whether or not such meetings are covered by the Ralph M. Brown Act; (Supervisor Yaroslavsky's revised Recommendation No. 1)

(Continued on Page 14)

- 13 -

Syn. 94 (Continued)

11. Instructed the Chief Administrative Officer to report back to the Board on the budget allocation/costs for use of outside counsel;

12. Referred Recommendation No. 7 of Supervisor Yaroslavsky's aforementioned recommendations relating to a policy that states in part that no subordinate violate any provision of the law to County Counsel and the independent counsel for review and report back;

13. Instructed the County Counsel to draft amendments to the Rules of the Board altering meeting procedures to: (Supervisor Yaroslavsky's amendment)

a. Report the roll-call vote of each nonconsent agenda item after it is taken, calling out the agenda number and identifying Board members who cast ayes, nays, and abstentions;

b. Provide a fuller explanation, in clearly understandable layperson's terms, of the legal basis for going into Closed Sessions; and

c. Require the announcement of actions taken during closed-door sessions, not only in the Statement of Proceedings, but also at the next Board meeting and in writing (including e-mail) to all those who have requested such notifications; and

14. Instructed the Executive Officer of the Board to place the tabulation of votes on the video tape with the names showing (Supervisor Antonovich's amendment); and

15. Took no action on Supervisor Burke's recommendation relating to posting and publicly distributing amendments to agenda motions or department recommendations at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting

4040202-94

Attachments

Copies distributed:

Each Supervisor

- 14 -