(Mar. 18, 2019, 5:45 p.m., updated Mar. 19, 9:50 a.m.) -- Some other outlets have matter-of-factly told their readers that the Long Beach City Council plans to hold a March 19 "closed session" to discuss a possible move by the California Angels to Long Beach in a stadium some say could be built in or around the surface parking lot adjoining the LB Convention Center.
[UPDATE Mar. 19, 8:26 a.m.: Kevin Lee, City of LB Public Affairs Officer emails LBREPORT.com: "The Closed Session item...is related to the ongoing conversations with the Angels regarding a potential sports venue in downtown Long Beach." [end UPDATE] Can the Mayor/City Council discuss a possible Angels deal outside of public/press view? That's governed by CA's Brown (open meetings) Act. The publicly agendized item states: Pursuant to Section 54956.8 of the California Government Code regarding a conference with the City's real property negotiator: CA Government Code section 54956.8 provides in pertinent part: Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, a legislative body of a local agency may hold a closed session with its negotiator prior to the purchase, sale, exchange, or lease of real property by or for the local agency to grant authority to its negotiator regarding the price and terms of payment for the purchase, sale, exchange, or lease. Scroll down for further.] |
Earlier today (March 18), Angels spokesperson Marie Garvey confirmed to us the accuracy of her quoted words in the PressTelegram/Gazettes (March 15) that Shoreline Investments, LLC is "the entity we [Angels] are using for the discussions." If the City is in reality negotiating with the Angels, the City's listing of some LLC doesn't truthfully disclose the real negotiating party, which is a Brown Act requirement.
As to what the Council/Mayor can discuss outside of public/press scrutiny, CA's First Amendment Coalition notes on its website that the Brown Act section on real estate negotiations "has been the subject of considerable abuse. For example, government agencies involved in enormous, multi-faceted transactions have used a real property portion of the potential transaction to discuss the entire matter in secret..." We don't believe the Brown Act allows the Mayor/Council to go behind closed doors for the stated limited purpose of negotiating price and terms for purchasing/leasing a piece of public property and use this as cover to hide wider discussion of aspects of the deal itself. Broader discussions of a matter of this speculated magnitude merit public, not closed door, discussion.
And despite what others have speculated or spun, the City still hasn't publicly provided basic journalistic "W"s about what's taken place: Who on the City's side engaged in discussions with the Angels? When did they do so? What did the City's rep(s) discuss and offer? Who, if any among LB Councilmembers, was briefed on this and by whom and when? LBREPORT.com remains very "old-school" about these things. Meanwhile, in a publicly open session on the same date (March 19), the Anaheim City Council will take up the following agenda item: [Anaheim City Council March 19 agendizing memo text] Developing.
blog comments powered by Disqus Recommend LBREPORT.com to your Facebook friends:
Follow LBReport.com with:
Contact us: mail@LBReport.com |
Hardwood Floor Specialists Call (562) 422-2800 or (714) 836-7050 |