Official Summary Text
SB 239, as amended, Arreguín.
Open meetings: teleconferencing: subsidiary body.
Crimes: criminal threats.
Existing law makes it a crime to willfully threaten to commit a crime that will result in death or great bodily injury to another person, as specified. Under existing law, this crime is punishable as a misdemeanor or by imprisonment in state prison as a felony. Existing law, for the purposes of sentencing for a felony violation of these provisions, authorizes the court to consider, as a factor in aggravation, that the defendant willfully threatened to commit a crime that would result in the death or great bodily injury of a state constitutional officer, a Member of the Legislature, or a judge or court commissioner, as specified.
This bill would
additionally authorize the court to consider, as a factor in aggravation, that the defendant willfully threatened to commit a crime that would result in the death or great bodily injury of a county or city elections official, or a local agency official, as specified.
Existing law, the Ralph M. Brown Act, requires, with specified exceptions, that all meetings of a legislative body, as defined, of a local agency be open and public and that all persons be permitted to attend and participate. The act generally requires for teleconferencing that the legislative body of a local agency that elects to use teleconferencing post agendas at all teleconference locations, identify each teleconference location in the notice and agenda of the meeting or proceeding, and have each teleconference location be accessible to the public. Existing law also requires that, during the teleconference, at least a quorum of the members of the legislative body participate from locations within the boundaries of the territory over which the local agency exercises jurisdiction, except as specified.
Existing law,
until January 1, 2026, authorizes specified neighborhood city councils to use alternate teleconferencing provisions related to notice, agenda, and public participation, as prescribed, if, among other requirements, the city council has adopted an authorizing resolution and
2
3
of the neighborhood city council votes to use alternate teleconference provisions, as specified.
This bill would authorize a subsidiary body, as defined, to use alternative teleconferencing provisions and would impose requirements for notice, agenda, and public participation, as prescribed. The bill would require the subsidiary body to post the agenda at each physical meeting location designated by the subsidiary body, as specified. The bill would require the members of the subsidiary body to visibly appear on camera during the open portion of a meeting that is publicly
accessible via the internet or other online platform, as specified. The bill would also require the subsidiary body to list a member of the subsidiary body who participates in a teleconference meeting from a remote location in the minutes of the meeting.
The bill would require the legislative body that established the subsidiary body electing to use teleconferencing pursuant to these provisions to establish the subsidiary body by charter, ordinance, resolution, or other formal action to make specified findings by majority vote, before the subsidiary body uses teleconferencing for the first time and every 12 months thereafter. The bill would require the subsidiary body to approve the use of teleconference by
2
3
vote before using teleconference pursuant to these provisions.
The bill would exempt from these alternative
teleconferencing provisions a subsidiary body that has subject matter jurisdiction over police oversight, elections, or budgets. The bill would require any member of a subsidiary body who is an elected official to comply with specified agenda and quorum requirements to participate in a meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section, and would require any final recommendations adopted by a subsidiary body to be presented at a regular meeting of the legislative body that established the subsidiary body. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2030, and thereby remove the authorization for subsidiary bodies to use the alternative teleconferencing provisions as described above.
Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and
the need for protecting that interest.
This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.
The California Constitution requires local agencies, for the purpose of ensuring public access to the meetings of public bodies and the writings of public officials and agencies, to comply with a statutory enactment that amends or enacts laws relating to public records or open meetings and contains findings demonstrating that the enactment furthers the constitutional requirements relating to this purpose.
This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.