Council to reconsider controversial closed meeting Council to reconsider controversial closed meeting (January 24, 2003)

Kleinberg wants to open the record on disputed October session

by Bill D'Agostino

More than a month after voting to keep a closed-door council meeting private, Councilwoman Judy Kleinberg persuaded the City Council to reconsider opening the gate to the controversial Oct. 30 council meeting and letting the public look inside.

"I am convinced it is in the public's best interest to open the record," Kleinberg said at Tuesday's meeting, reading a prepared statement. "I believe that maintaining the confidentiality of the closed session appears as an attempt to keep information private that in this instance rightfully belongs to the public."

After her announcement, the council voted to hold a future discussion on opening the meeting. Four council members -- Jack Morton, Bern Beecham, Dena Mossar and Jim Burch -- agreed with Kleinberg, while three -- Vic Ojakian, Yoriko Kishimoto and Hillary Freeman -- thought otherwise.

Councilwoman Nancy Lytle abstained from the vote.

Councilman Vic Ojakian criticized Kleinberg's request. "I'm sorry we've reach this stage where one member votes one moment and then has a change of heart," Ojakian said.

The Oct. 30 meeting was an evaluation of City Attorney Ariel Callone, prompted by an e-mail he wrote complaining about a comment of Lytle's at a public hearing.

When the council voted last month to keep that meeting closed, Kleinberg was the swing vote. At the time, the councilwoman said she wanted to open up the meeting but was swayed by arguments from assistant City Attorney Bill Mayfield, who warned that doing so would set a dangerous precedent and jeopardize the confidentiality of future closed sessions.

After meeting with a separate, outside attorney, Kleinberg said she changed her mind.

"The issue of precedent is an important and critical issue and not one to be taken lightly, but I firmly believe that the council has always had -- and will continue to have -- complete discretion to hold closed sessions when confidentiality is critical and allowed under the law, and that that discretion will not be diminished by our opening the record of this one meeting which I believe should not have been agendized and held as a closed session in any case," Kleinberg added.

Ojakian, however, still feared the repercussions of opening the meeting.

"I have a difficulty in opening our closed session because I don't know where that whole concept is going to end," he said. "The feeling I'm left with is if the pressure becomes tough enough on people -- depending on who puts it on -- council members might choose to open up future closed sessions.

"That's a real difficult matter in my opinion."

Even if the meeting is opened, the controversial e-mail that prompted the meeting -- and has never been made public -- might not see the light of day since Calonne could decide to not release it. Kleinberg said his decision would have to be "completely voluntary, without pressure or intimidation."

The announcement and subsequent vote came around 12:30 a.m. Wednesday, following more than two hours of private discussion about a Palo Alto Weekly lawsuit regarding the same Oct. 30 council meeting. The San Jose Mercury News announced its own lawsuit on the matter this week.

The Weekly is alleging the council violated the state's open government law at the Oct. 30 meeting, and has failed to disclose e-mails related to the session.

The law, known as the Brown Act, allows cities to meet behind closed doors to discuss potential lawsuits, personnel evaluations, labor negotiations and real-estate deals, but the Weekly contends the meeting did not fulfill any of those requirements.

Kleinberg said her decision to open the meeting came before the Weekly announced its suit.

"The sooner we clarify the facts, the sooner we can have proper closure to this matter, truly put it behind us, and focus all of our energy on the important challenges facing our community that we were elected to do," Kleinberg said. "What is critical is that our city government be transparent. Transparency is fundamental to effective government. By opening the record, our city government will right a wrong and reaffirm its commitment to the importance of open government in a democracy."

E-mail Bill D'Agostino at billd@paweekly.com A version of this story appeared Wednesday at www.paloaltoonline.com