Happy Sunshine Week!
Sunshine Week is an annual celebration of government transparency that’s coordinated by the American Society of News Editors and the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.
2016 marks the 11th year that Sunshine Week has sparked dialogue and reporting, nation-wide, to spotlight the efforts and commitments of those who demand open and accountable government at all levels.
Seems like an apt time for an update on my Transparency Quest, especially since I just got an email from Chief Deputy District Attorney of Santa Barbara County, Kelly Scott, to let me know that she is writing a letter of inquiry to the Lompoc City Council, regarding my Brown Act complaint.
When I first talked to Kelly Scott, I asked her if she remembered the details of her previous investigation of the Lompoc City Council. She did, of course, and her first question was, is that City Attorney still there? What was his name? Joseph Pannone, I replied. Oh, aahhhh, she said, yes, I remember him.
This is happening a little less speedily than I might have wished - I TRY to be patient - but the good news is, Ms. Scott HAS initiated the investigation and is reviewing my cease and desist letter and other related documents.
So I shared my good news with the City Council. From the meeting on March 15, here's the text of my public comment:
I have been reminded – and I’m here to remind the city council now - that “The wheels of justice grind slowly, but they grind exceedingly fine.” The Santa Barbara County District Attorney’s office is investigating my Brown Act complaint and your improper response to my cease and desist letter. On March 7th I was informed that the Chief Deputy District Attorney, Kelly Scott, is planning to write a letter of inquiry to your City Attorney. You might recognize the name – Kelly Scott – since Ms. Scott is the same attorney who wrote a cautionary letter, the last time the city council was accused of a Brown Act violation.
At that time Mayor Lingl, you were quoted by the Lompoc Record as follows: “I’m going to be leading the city down a path of openness - as opposed to personal agendas, micromanagement, and legal actions by the district attorney’s office.”
I am here to give you a heads up about this most recent District Attorney’s inquiry, so you’ll have some thinking time on what a “path of openness” might look like in this case. Otherwise, when Mr. Pannone gets the letter from Ms. Scott, I’m afraid he will draft a reply without consulting with you, in an attempt to make the whole thing disappear quietly. I’m afraid that you’ll be gobsmacked into silence and acquiescence – that you’ll decide to follow the advice of your attorney without question. I think that would be a mistake. Instead, I think you might want to back the train up, and take a serious look at when the council is permitted to have closed sessions.
Mayor Lingl, you stated, “I always have, and I will, operate with complete transparency.” In fact, all of you have said, publicly and repetitively, that the city council is committed to transparency.
I don’t believe that to be true any longer, but please, prove me wrong. Prove your commitment by putting transparency on the agenda of a future city council meeting. Schedule a workshop on the importance of open government, and ask for the public’s feedback and input. Invite a Brown Act expert to Lompoc, to educate you and other interested citizens.
Or, you could do nothing. But if that’s your choice, please, stop telling the citizens of Lompoc that you’re committed to transparency.Coming up: For Part 2, I was planning on the rather depressing post title: City Council Decides Against Transparency Discussion. But since the meeting, there has been a positive development - read about it here: One of Five City Council Members Willing to Talk Transparency.
