FYI: Oakland Council voting tonight on new California TRANSPARENCY law

[Phil Wolff]

Should Oakland endorse Prop 42? CMs Kalb and Kaplan are putting a resolution to the Council tonight to support this new law; final vote. They're inviting the public to speak on tonight, agenda item #16. I'll be stepping out for a minute this evening to speak in favor. - Phil

Text:

Resolution in SUPPORT of California Proposition 42 - Constitutional Amendment to protect the public's right to know by requiring compliance by local agencies with the Public Records Act and the Brown Act for open meetings

WHEREAS, public transparency and freedom of information safeguards are of
significant importance to and benefit for the citizens of Oakland and California and the integrity of government; and

WHEREAS, the California Public Records Act, passed in 1968, is a critical tool
for the public and the press and facilitates obtaining government records, awareness of the activities of government, and effective advocacy in the interests of the community; and

WHEREAS, the Ralph M. Brown Act, passed in 1953, guarantees the public's
right to attend and participate in legislative bodies of local agencies, including boards, commissions, and councils; and

WHEREAS, state and local governments have been in disagreement regarding
the amount of state financial support that is required address the costs to local
governments with complying with these transparency laws and, at times, local agencies have used the failure of the state to reimburse their costs as an excuse for not complying with the transparency laws; and

WHEREAS, requiring the state to reimburse local governments for compliance
costs with these laws does not encourage local governments to take steps to reduce their compliance costs, such as through proactive transparency procedures; and

WHEREAS, California Proposition 42 on the June 2014 ballot would secure the
California Public Records Act and the Ralph M. Brown Act in the State Constitution and relieve the State from paying for local governments' costs of compliance with these open government laws; now, therefore, be it

RESOLVED: That the Oakland City Council hereby endorses Proposition 42.

https://oakland.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=1739719&GUID=98A2B363-B936-4EF3-9B76-F5D2682DC7E4

More on the law...

• League of Women Voters: http://www.smartvoter.org/2014/06/03/ca/state/prop/42/
• EFF (Vote Yes): https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/05/california-voters-check-yes-42
  
• Pando Daily's analysis (insightful on the implications): http://pando.com/2014/05/02/oh-the-things-prop-42-could-do-for-the-open-government-movement/ 
• California Legislative Analyst's Office (cities have to pay for their own compliance, a few $10s of millions statewide): http://www.lao.ca.gov/ballot/2014/prop-42-062014.aspx

[John C. Osborn]

Watch for Gallo's reaction to this. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenOakland" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openoakland...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to openo...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openoakland/CANER2SjXP%2BUPV9Ukb_ZLW7-EgdpdMHnc%3Djx9rTkdnw7KxHE%2B7g%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

John C. Osborn
Digital Communications Manager
EdSource
707-845-7332
www.johncosborn.com
@bayreporta
Flickr: thereporta

STATEMENT OF CONFIDENTIALITY
The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments may contain confidential or privileged information intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and any attachments. In accordance with Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C.§§ 2510-2521.

[Phil Wolff]

John, Gallo voted for it in the first round; not sure why.

[Michael Ubell]

My original thought on reading this was: let the state pay, they have more money than Oakland.  In chatting with someone from the LWV I realize that this posistion inhibits openness as the city can cop out by saying the state is not paying them enough, or on time, or what ever.  This should be just part of running the city government and is not really a “state mandate”.

So I am in favor.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openoakland/CAEQ1d_NC9jq_cAeWc%3DL%2BUyDmEyGZ1EFOkY27QXo2UOSHxGJD8w%40mail.gmail.com.

[John C. Osborn]

He came out recently saying he had no interest in spending more money on the public ethics commission, because it could divert money that could go to public safety. Seeing as Prop 42 puts the financial responsibility of paying for open government to local government, that's why I made the comment I made. 

On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 3:32 PM, Phil Wolff <pwo...@gmail.com> wrote:

John, Gallo voted for it in the first round; not sure why.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenOakland" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openoakland...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to openo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openoakland/CANER2Sg8gkKPo47D8a1SzKgvePJoWVU%3Dzm2hq7LK6pTiLsU%3D8Q%40mail.gmail.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Miguel Vargas]

I think this is a bad constitutional amendment. It's disguised as a transparency law but it's really about shifting costs from the state to local governments.

In any case, these city council "endorsement" bills are just for political grandstanding purposes and are completely meaningless.

p.s. I'm not really liking this crossposting to a bunch of email lists like this.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenOakland" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openoakland...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to openo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openoakland/CANER2SjXP%2BUPV9Ukb_ZLW7-EgdpdMHnc%3Djx9rTkdnw7KxHE%2B7g%40mail.gmail.com.

[Eddie Tejeda]

You all might recall the battle over AB 76 (refresher).

I agree with you Miguel, this measure is not as clean cut as it seems. The key part of the language is the following:

WHEREAS, California Proposition 42 on the June 2014 ballot would secure the California Public Records Act and the Ralph M. Brown Act in the State Constitution and relieve the State from paying for local governments' costs of compliance with these open government laws; now, therefore, be it

Ballotpedia describes it as:

The initiative would result in a fiscal savings for the state government, but would likely result in comparable revenue reductions to local governments. 

What's interesting is that organizations, like EFF, support the bill. I think it's because it ensures the local governments will comply and don't have excuses for not participating, but I would preferred to required compliance while also requiring the state to do better accounting for its costs.

Technically, I believe this ballot measure won't affect Oakland. We already have Sunshine Ordinance, inherits and expands the state's CPRA and Brown Act and from what I've gathered, Oakland is not reimbursed by the state for complying.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openoakland/CA%2Bn2%3D%2BA4y60cSw04sA6OG9HcWBmS9ojxuu%2B_K-iOnELd%2Bxef8Q%40mail.gmail.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Eddie A. Tejeda

@eddietejeda

2012 Fellow, Code for America

http://codeforamerica.org

[Michael Ubell]

Eddie,

I think the big argument in favor is that being open should be part of governing, not something extra.  Apparently some jurisdictions were billing the state for posting notices on bulletin boards in city hall.

Mike  

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openoakland/CAALX_7aTt20OYwP1xJM1xaswzU7iuNvYzgNUgr6TfoJ%3DAXeCfw%40mail.gmail.com.