Did Rail Authority flout sunshine law?

Did Rail Authority flout sunshine law?

CHSRAAt a recent meeting of the California High-Speed Rail Authority, a board member announced a closed executive session but provided no exception as required by the state’s sunshine law, citizen attendees said.

State law requires government bodies to notify the public of closed, or executive, sessions in advance and to specify what exception under the open meetings law – such as pending litigation or personnel  matters – allows for the closed meeting. The notice for the March 10 finance and audit committee meeting made no mention of a closed session.

“It seems quite possible that the Board violated the requirements” of state open meetings law, said Gary Patton, a lawyer and former state and county official who heads a nonprofit that opposes the rail project. “The public is permitted to be present for everything, except for very specific issues, legal issues and a few other exceptions such as personnel issues.”

The rail authority, though, says what transpired was not an executive session, but a “private discussion with a member of Authority staff” attended by four board members – less than the Authority’s five-member quorum.

“The Authority’s Chief Legal Counsel was present to assure that no Bagley-Keene (open meetings law) violations occurred,” a rail authority spokeswoman said by email. “Board members are at liberty to meet privately with staff to discuss high-speed rail matters.”

A tight squeeze

On March 10, a dozen residents of the Central Valley traveled for hours to Sacramento to attend a meeting of the agency that is planning a $68 billion rail project through their community.

Since they had made the journey, they attended the Finance and Audit Committee meeting held prior to the meeting of the full board. The subcommittee consists of Michael Rossi, a retired vice chairman of BankAmerica Corporation, and Tom Richards, CEO of a Fresno-based real estate investment company.

Print“The room was very small, so small that you would have to jump over someone’s briefcase to leave the room,” said Frank Oliveira, co-chair of the residents’ group, the Citizens for California High-Speed Rail Accountability, which opposes the rail project.

In fact, there were people who stood around the door leading into the meeting to listen because there was no room for them to enter. According to Oliveira and another member of the citizens’ group, Alan Scott, their presence seemed to inhibit conversation.

No exception to open meeting law

Four board members were in attendance: Rossi, who chairs the committee; Richards; Lynn Schenk, an attorney; and the authority’s newest board member, former state Sen. Lou Correa.

At the end of the meeting, Rossi asked Schenk to stay and pointed to various others in the room to stay as well, Oliveira and Scott said.

Rossi told the citizens they were now going into an “executive staff meeting,” Scott said, and provided no exception under open meetings law.

Rossi, Richards and two other board members stayed behind, rail authority spokeswoman Lisa Marie Alley said. Contacted by CalWatchdog March 27, Rossi did not respond directly to an emailed request for comment but forwarded the message to Alley.

“Legally, there is no exception to the state’s open meeting law, based on the Authority’s desire to have a private meeting,” Patton said.

You can’t legally meet in a closed session because the agency “wants to have a frank and open discussion among only members on a matter of controversy, or when sensitive financial information is at issue,” Patton said. “From all appearances, the public should have been allowed in this meeting.”

Bagley Keene Open Meeting Act

Members of the public can take government agencies to court for open meetings act violations.

According to the Bagley Keene Open Meeting Act:

“Each member of a state body who attends a meeting of that body in violation of any provision of this article, and where the member intends to deprive the public of information to which the member knows or has reason to know the public is entitled under this article, is guilty of a misdemeanor.”

Court costs and fees may be awarded to the plaintiff if a state body is found in violation. However, no member would be personally liable; the state would pay from tax dollars.

“To the extent that a body receives information under circumstances where the public is deprived of the opportunity to monitor the information provided, and either agree with it or challenge it, the open-meeting process is deficient,” an AG handbook on open meetings law says.

Here is an updated 2015 guide to the Bagley Keene Open Meeting Act


Kathy Hamilton is the Ralph Nader of high-speed rail, continually uncovering hidden aspects of the project and revealing them to the public.  She started writing in order to tell local communities how the project affects them and her reach grew statewide.  She has written more than 225 articles on high-speed rail and attended hundreds of state and local meetings. She is a board member of the Community Coalition on High-Speed Rail; has testified at government hearings; has provided public testimony and court declarations on public records act requests; has given public testimony; and has provided transcripts for the validation of court cases. 

6 comments

Write a comment
  1. Wolfman
    Wolfman 9 April, 2015, 10:58

    Californians have been getting ripped off on gas prices for years and are now accustomed to it

    Reply this comment
  2. Charles Lung
    Charles Lung 9 April, 2015, 11:46

    There’s a ballot initiative I could get behind. Make those who participate responsible for a $10,000 fine.

    Reply this comment
  3. desmond
    desmond 9 April, 2015, 18:26

    Wouldn’t t be great if a couple zombies visited Rossi?

    Reply this comment
  4. Dork
    Dork 10 April, 2015, 09:28

    However, no member would be personally liable; the state would pay from tax dollars.

    And there is the Problem with most of Government, No PERSONAL Responsibility, We the People deserve and need AMNESTY from Any and misdeeds perpetrated by Public Officials, Public Servants, and Public Employees. When they have to PAY for Their Corruption, it will STOP.

    Reply this comment
  5. Grapes of Wrath
    Grapes of Wrath 10 April, 2015, 12:47

    Kathy Hamilton is the Ralph Nader of high-speed rail. This is such an accurate statement. Thanks Kathy for all that you do. Thanks for the great, informative research and follow-up story on the “Appraisal Process”. Values are two sided, buyer, the Agency, wants cheap, seller the property owner, should want expensive. Right of Way Agent, possibly on a “commission based compensation package” wants payment for services or closings. Fiduciary to either side may be subject to compromising of the “deal”, time to market and pressure to “close the deal”. Property owner needs to be more aware of the importance of its ability to slow the process and benefit from the highest value possible based on a third party appraisal. Comparable property sales are sparse, especially in a down market. This is a fox in the hen house moment. Regarding the possible violation of the Bagley Keene Open Meeting Act; I believe the issue will be swept under the carpet. When I read this article, the first thought that came to mind was transparency and accountability. Good luck. Probably not practical, and surely would be resisted, but the following could be considered a deterrent or method of accountability and transparency in these so called, necessary, closed meetings. The airline industry has a black box (or boxes) that record activities, conversations, data, etc. during a flight. These are available to offer information that may be pertinent to a specific issue or occasion. Each closed session should be a “black box moment”. If the purpose of the “closed session” is justified, then the participants should not object to the “black box”. Its recorded content, only available in a questionable moment, similar to and as described in this article, and release of its content to “Judge Judy” to evaluate any possible impropriety.

    Reply this comment
    • Kathy Hamilton
      Kathy Hamilton 11 April, 2015, 17:26

      Love the Judge Judy part. But I do believe that at least an audio tape could record the meeting and if there was a question, a court could listen to it.

      The only one time that there was a tape was years ago, I think 2011 when Curt Pringle was chairman and the then Executive Director CEO, Mehdi Morshed actually said, the contractors were taking gifts all over the place. I remember Pringle said to the guy, “You can’t say that.” He meant you can’t say that when a tape recorder is running. That beauty is on Californians Advocating Responsible Rail Design’s website. Go to home page, go to the left and scroll down to the word transcripts- it will be 2010 or 2011 and I believe it’s under the Executive Subcommittee meeting. There’s a transcript and tape.

      There is no personal responsibility, no fines, no prison sentence for telling outright lies that have the potential of costing the public billions of tax dollars. It has to stop.

      Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Your e-mail address will not be published.
Required fields are marked*



Related Articles

Rail court decision could run over future bonds

Is there a cow catcher on the front of the California high-speed rail project? One that pushes away future bond

CA stricken with vaccine controversy

As a rash of measles outbreaks raises health alarms, Californians are caught in a national crossfire of controversy over a new trend

Karma time: Unions figure out Obamacare is a nightmare

Feb. 5, 2013 By Chris Reed As I noted in a CalWatchdog post last week, the California media are covering the