Brown Act Violations

Greetings!

About three weeks ago, I raised with your staff member (Michael Gause) my belief that the Sonoma County Homeless Coalition Board had violated the California Brown Act.  My email to him is below.

Greetings!

The meeting of the Sonoma County Homeless Coalition yesterday violated the California Brown Act by:

  1. Introducing, discussing, and taking action on an item not legally agendized.
  2. Coalition members and staff had received and were discussing a letter at the center of the discussion not made available to the public.
  3. Coalition leadership directed staff to conduct an investigation into the performance of a subcontractor charged in the letter, and report back to the Coalition.

As the Lead Agency to the Sonoma County Homeless Coalition (Continuum of Care), you are responsible for advising the Coalition during any meeting of their variance from the meeting requirements contained in the California Brown Act.  I believe that it was apparent to anyone trained in the Act that the Coalition began to violate the Act requirements toward the end of the meeting when the Chair asked members to discuss a letter they had all received from a member of the public.  I believe that you should have advised them that their actions were beginning to violate the provisions of the Brown Act.   Such actions seriously jeopardize the SCHC’s standing as a recipient of State funding directed to CoCs in good standing, and your use of the administrative cost reimbursements.  In addition, while I am aware that a MOU has still not been signed between the Department and the Coalition, I would assume that continued funding from California HCD to the Department and its subcontractors is dependent on its successful approval.

I have notified the County Executive of my concerns, and asked her to engage the County Counsel to review the meeting video to confirm or deny my conclusions.  I ask you to review all your and Coalition actions at the meeting, and be prepared to respond to the County Executive and County Counsel’s questions.  Also, please consider what actions may be necessary to move forward to remedy the violations.

Gregory Fearon

Michael replied to two of my assertions (below).

Hi Gregory,

I am also including Jennielynn and Una here.  To address your concerns:

  • This was brought up during the “Board Member Questions and Comments” Item on the agenda as a comment from the Board Member, Jackie Elward, thus it was on an agenda item that is reserved for specific comments and questions.  
  • No action was taken, no vote was take that gave direction to staff.

My best,

Michael 

Michael Gause

Ending Homelessness Program Manager

Sonoma County Department of Health Services – Homelessness Services Division

1450 Neotomas Avenue, Suite 115

Santa Rosa, CA 95405

(707) 791-8140 Michael.Gause@sonoma-county.org

The following is being supplied tomorrow to the Sonoma County Homeless Coalition Board in the monthly staff report (Follow up on SHARE Sonoma County Questions):

5. Follow up on SHARE Sonoma County Questions: The Coalition Board requested clarity on issues related to SHARE Sonoma County at the June Board meeting.  As there is no formal process for an investigation by the Coalition Board in this matter, an investigation is currently underway by the Department of Health Services Compliance Unit for contract and program compliance as the Department of Health Services has an obligation to the Funding Sources and the County of Sonoma. We will report out as appropriate and applicable per Counsel to the Coalition Board as the Department of Health Services serves as the Lead Agency for the Coalition Board. 

I repeat my belief that, as a result of the three independent violations cited in my first email, the discussion in the last part of the June 26th Sonoma County Homeless Coalition Board meeting violated the California Brown Act.  I reject your staff member’s assertion that the conversation in the “Board Members Questions and Comments” agenda item meets the test of the public’s perception of that description.  The topic brought up was not discussed in any way prior to the beginning of the agenda item.

Second, and not addressed by your staff member, the letter being discussed was distributed to the Board, but not distributed to the public prior to the discussion.

Finally, this month’s staff followup report confirms that direction was given to staff, and indicates the actions that have been taken (see above text).

I request that the Sonoma County Homeless Coalition Board acknowledge their violations, and takes immediate actions to “cure or correct the challenged actions”.  I will be communicating this challenged behavior officially to the Board at tomorrow’s Board meeting.   As I believe that Board has thirty days to cure or correct the challenged actions, should the Board choose not to, I will be authorized to file suit (alternate writ of mandamus in Sonoma County Superior Court) to void the actions (54960.1).

Gregory Fearon