Laserfiche WebLink
!AI <br />BEST BEST & KRiEGER 3 <br />ATTORNEYS AT LAW <br />the Brown Act. If members share their positions with third parties, they create a potential <br />intermediary to cause a violation of the Brown Act. And also remember, only members <br />of the body are liable for compliance with the Brown Act. <br />Many constituents' unfamiliarity with the requirements of the Brown Act <br />aggravate this potential problem because they may believe that a Brown Act body <br />member should, in the ordinary course of performing his or her public duty, commit to a <br />position in a private conversation in advance of a meeting. <br />To avoid discussing, deliberating, or taking action by way of constituent <br />conversation, please consider the following guidelines: <br />1. In private meetings, state the ground rules up front. Make it clear that the <br />constituent should not disclose the views of other members during the <br />conversation. <br />2. Engage in more listening and asking questions rather than expressing <br />views or opinions. <br />3. Explain to the constituent that you will not make a final decision on a <br />matter prior to the meeting on the subject matter. <br />4. At the end of the conversation, if you have disclosed your thoughts about <br />a matter, counsel the constituent not to share'your thoughts with other <br />members of the Brown Act body. <br />C. Contacts with fellow Brown Act body members <br />Direct contact concerning local agency business with fellow members of the <br />same Brown Act body is the most obvious means by which an illegal serial meeting can <br />occur. This contact can occur through face-to-face or telephone conversations or text or <br />email messages. <br />93939.0020H\31180968.1 -5- <br />This product provided under the Public Policy & Ethics Group Program <br />