Town Square

Post a New Topic

Audit Committee Meeting & Brown Act

Original post made by Business As Usual on Jun 15, 2011

The Town just posted the agenda for TOMORROW'S Audit Committee meeting. Aren't they supposed to give 72 hours notice? Perhaps it was posted at the train station ...

Seems to me in this day and age, they should be posting on the Internet 72 hours in advance, particularly with committees with no standing calendar!

So much for open government!

Comments (11)

Posted by Peter Carpenter, a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jun 15, 2011 at 4:21 pm

The 16 June Audit Committee meeting is a Special Meeting.

Special Meeting agendas must be posted at least 24 hours in advance vs 72 hours in advance for Regular Meetings.


Posted by Ed, a resident of Atherton: other
on Jun 15, 2011 at 5:23 pm

Peter--we are lucky that tell us any thing anymore and by the way, that we even have an audit committee again--please remember that it was disbanded for at least a year there to punish the entire committee membership for supporting the previous finance director and his audit report. By the way what's the meeting time and place time and place please?


Posted by Peter Carpenter, a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jun 15, 2011 at 5:45 pm

Town of Atherton
AUDIT COMMITTEE AGENDA Revised
JUNE 16, 2011
2:00 PM
TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
94 Ashfield Road
Atherton, California


Posted by Business As Usual, a resident of Atherton: other
on Jun 15, 2011 at 9:18 pm

I guess every meeting is "special" when the committee has no standing calendar. More of the same smoke filled room policy making that is so endemic to this town. The council espouses transparency, but plays fast and loose with the Brown Act''s 72 hour notification when it suits its purposes.


Posted by Peter Carpenter, a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jun 15, 2011 at 9:39 pm

Business as Usual - I recommend that you ask the Town to schedule regular meetings of the Audit Committee - any one of which could be cancelled if there is no pending business.


Posted by Business As Usual, a resident of Atherton: other
on Jun 24, 2011 at 9:24 pm

As if it weren't enough to skirt the 72 hour notification, the members stopped the recorder and continued the meeting. I think they call that a closed session.

Don't they have to announce such a session in advance and report their actions?


Posted by Peter Carpenter, a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jun 25, 2011 at 12:00 am

The Brown Act does not require that a meeting be recorded but simply that meetings, with few exceptions, be opened to the public.

Was the public required to leave this meeting?


Posted by Business As Usual, a resident of Atherton: other
on Jun 25, 2011 at 8:07 pm

No, the "public" wasn't there. Apparently, with 24 hours notice, nobody attended. The council decries the Town's apathy. When they hold a meeting with just 24 hours notice on a work day, they aren't exactly encouraging involvement, are they?

To your question, the committee did ask one of the attendees to leave the room. And, when they started discussing personnel matters, they turned off the recorder.

Where's the sunshine? Wasn't the Brown Act meant to stop this kind of activity?

The Audit Committee called a last minute, inconvenient meeting. They probably knew nobody would show. Then, they intentionally turned off the recording so nobody would know what they did.

Not Atherton's proudest moment.


Posted by punchbowl, a resident of Atherton: other
on Jun 26, 2011 at 7:22 am

I did not listen to the entire meeting but it sounds like the punchbowl was out and collectively they were having a party. Certainly not the decorum one would expect with the Mayor and Vice-Mayor present in dealing with important Town matters. It is really a glimpse into how the Town is being, run and it is not encouraging if this is the best they can do. Many comments made sound seem to indicate the some members of the committee are arrogant, full of themselves and flippant.
Perhaps the last words on the recording, "shouldn't we turn this thing off" as they begin to work over poor Louise Ho in a non-agendized meeting seem to be clearly a violation of the Brown Act but more importantly very poor taste.


Posted by Peter Carpenter, a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jun 27, 2011 at 2:01 pm

I have listened to the recording of this meeting and heard nothing which seemed to either violate the Brown Act or to be indecorous.


Posted by Ed, a resident of Atherton: other
on Jun 28, 2011 at 12:27 am

I know that the APD has lately been video taping the Council Meetings for it's officers to view later on line, but how are they getting the audio recordings of Town committee meetings at which only committee members were in attendance-like this Audit Committee Meeting?
I hope that the City Clerk is not lending the APOA the only original copy of any meeting audio recordings, and that the APOA is required to follow the same protocol as the general public -by purchasing copies made only on formal request and only legally made by the City Clerk.
Unfortunately I have to say that the Council Meeting audio on the video made by the APD did not always match my own clear memory of some of the statements made by residents, all of whom were off camera and therefore pretty easy to edit out.


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Touring the Southern California “Ivies:” Pomona and Cal Tech
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 5 comments | 3,142 views

Couples: Parallel Play or Interactive Play?
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 1,399 views

Just say no
By Jessica T | 6 comments | 1,333 views

Getting High in Menlo Park
By Paul Bendix | 3 comments | 845 views

As They Head Back To School, Arm Them With This
By Erin Glanville | 4 comments | 316 views