|
OPINION
of BILL LOCKYER,
Attorney
General;
MARJORIE E.
COX, Deputy Attorney General
No. 01-401
Office of
the Attorney General of the State of California
Filed March
14, 2002
THE
HONORABLE TONY STRICKLAND, MEMBER OF THE STATE ASSEMBLY, has requested an opinion on the
following questions:
Do
the open meeting requirements of the Ralph M. Brown Act apply to the meetings of the
governing board of a private, nonprofit corporation formed for the purpose of providing
programming for a cable television channel set aside for educational use by a cable
operator pursuant to its franchise agreement with a city and subsequently designated by
the city to provide the programming services?
Do
the records disclosure requirements of the Public Records Act apply to such a corporation?
CONCLUSIONS
The
open meeting requirements of the Ralph M. Brown Act apply to the meetings of the governing
board of a private, nonprofit corporation formed for the purpose of providing programming
for a cable television channel set aside for educational use by a cable operator pursuant
to its franchise agreement with a city and subsequently designated by the city to provide
the programming services.
The
records disclosure requirements of the Public Records Act apply to a private, nonprofit
corporation formed for the purpose of providing programming for a cable television channel
set aside for educational use by a cable operator pursuant to its franchise agreement with
a city and subsequently designated by the city to provide the programming services.
ANALYSIS
In
1995, the City of Thousand Oaks ("City" ) granted Ventura County Cablevision
("Cablevision" ) a franchise to install and operate a cable television system
within the City. Cablevision agreed to set aside a channel for educational use and to
operate the channel until such time as the City designated a nonprofit corporation to
assume operational control. Cablevision also agreed to grant $25,000 for the purchase of
television production equipment to a consortium of educators to be designated by the City.[FOOTNOTE
1]
In
1996, a nonprofit public benefit corporation ("Corporation" ) was organized with
the stated purpose of "join[ing] together the area' s schools, universities, and
colleges and other educational organizations in order to establish and implement policies
for the management, utilization, programming and scheduling of one or more dedicated
educational access community cable TV channels. . . ." The City designated the
Corporation as the entity responsible for programming the educational access channel
("Channel 21" ) to be set aside under Cablevision' s franchise agreement. The
City also designated the Corporation as the recipient of Cablevision' s $25,000 production
equipment grant and similar grants, thereby providing the Corporation with an initial
capitalization of $57,000.
The
Corporation currently has five directors, three of whom are appointed by the Conejo Valley
Unified School District ("School District" ); the other two directors must be
approved by the School District. One of the Corporation' s directors is a School District
trustee. The School District provides $200 annually towards the Corporation' s franchise
fees.
Insofar
as we have been advised, no City officer has served as a director of the Corporation, and
the City has not directly contributed money to the Corporation since the original grants
of $57,000. However, the City has the right to review and approve any guidelines the
Corporation has or might adopt concerning the use of Channel 21 and has the right to
terminate the authority previously delegated to the Corporation to provide programming for
the channel.
1. Public
Meeting Requirements
The
first question to be resolved is whether the meetings of the Corporation' s board of
directors are subject to the open meeting requirements of the Ralph M. Brown Act (Gov.
Code, § § 54950-54962; "Brown Act" ).[FOOTNOTE
2] We
conclude that they are.
The
Brown Act generally requires the legislative body of a local public agency to hold its
meetings open to members of the public. (§ § 54951, 54952, 54953, 54962.) Agendas of the
meetings must be posted (§ § 54954.1, 54954.2), and the public must be given an
opportunity to address the legislative body on items of interest (§ 54954.3).
The
evident purposes of the Brown Act are to allow the public to attend, observe, monitor, and
participate in the decision-making process at the local level of government. Not only are
the actions taken by the legislative body to be monitored by the public but also the
deliberations leading to the actions taken. (§ 54950; see Roberts v. City of Palmdale (1993) 5
Cal.4th 363, 373, 375; Frazer v. Dixon Unified School Dist. (1993) 18 Cal.App.4th
781, 794-798; Stockton Newspapers, Inc. v. Redevelopment Agency (1985)
171 Cal.App.3d 95, 100; Sacramento Newspaper Guild v.
Sacramento County Bd. of Suprs. (1968) 263 Cal.App.2d 41, 45.)
Subdivision
(a) of section 54953 provides for meetings of local agencies to be open to the public:
"
All meetings of the legislative body of a lo
cal agency
shall be open and public, and all persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting of the
legislative body of a local agency, except as otherwise provided in this chapter."
A
"local agency" is defined in section 54951 as follows:
"
As used in this chapter, ' local agency'
means a
county, city, whether general law or chartered, city and county, town, school district,
municipal corporation, district, political subdivision, or any board, commission or agency
thereof, or other local public agency."
The
term "legislative body" is defined in section 54952 to include the board of
private corporations in specified circumstances:
"
As used in this chapter, ' legislative body'
means:
".
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "
"(c)(1)
A board, commission, committee, or
other
multimember body that governs a private corporation or entity that either:
"(A)
Is created by the elected legislative body
in order to
exercise authority that may lawfully be delegated by the elected governing body to a
private corporation or entity.
"(B)
Receives funds from a local agency and
the
membership of whose governing body includes a member of the legislative body of the local
agency appointed to that governing body as a full voting member by the legislative body of
the local agency.
".
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "
Under
the language of section 54952, subdivision (c)(1)(A), the board of directors of the
Corporation would constitute a "legislative body" subject to the Brown Act if
the Corporation was created by an elected legislative body to exercise authority lawfully
delegated by such elected legislative body. (See Epstein v. Hollywood Entertainment Dist. II Bus.
Improvement Dist. (2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 862, 868-873; International Longshoremen' s
& Warehousemen' s
Union v. Los Angeles Export Terminal, Inc. (1999) 69 Cal.App.4th 287, 293-300.)
In
the present circumstances, the city council of the City (an elected legislative body of a
local agency) played a role in bringing the Corporation into existence by (1) granting a
franchise to Cablevision, (2) requiring Cablevision to set aside an educational channel,
(3) designating the Corporation as the entity to operate the channel, and (4) indirectly
providing the Corporation with an initial capitalization of $57,000. The term
"created by" in section 54952, subdivision (c)(1)(A), means that the "City
' played a role in bringing' the [private corporation] ' into existence.'
[Citation.]" (Epstein v. Hollywood Entertainment Dist. II Bus. Improvement
Dist., supra, 87 Cal.App.4th at p. 870, citing International Longshoremen' s &
Warehousemen' s Union v. Los
Angeles Export Terminal, Inc., supra, 69 Cal.App.4th at p. 295.)
The
authority to operate the educational access channel was lawfully delegated to the
Corporation by the city council of the City. (See § 53066; 47 U.S.C. § § 521, 531; see
also International Longshoremen' s & Warehousemen' s Union v. Los Angeles
Export Terminal, Inc., supra, 69 Cal.App.4th at p. 297 ["a public body may delegate
the performance of administrative functions to a private entity if it retains ultimate
control over administration so that it may safeguard the public interest" ].) Here,
the City has reserved the right to review and approve any guidelines the Corporation has
concerning the use of Channel 21 and has reserved the right to terminate its authority
previously delegated to the Corporation.
Both
of the conditions of section 54952, subdivision (c)(1)(A), have therefore been met,
resulting in the Corporation' s board coming within the meaning of a "legislative
body" for purposes of the Brown Act' s requirements.
Moreover,
the Corporation' s board also constitutes a "legislative body" under the terms
of section 54952, subdivision (c)(1)(B). The Corporation receives funds from the School
District, a local agency (§ 54951). Not only does the School District appoint three of
the Corporation' s five directors, it must approve the appointments of the other two
directors as well. One of the School District' s trustees is a Corporation director with
full voting rights. Hence, the Corporation' s board constitutes a "legislative
body" as defined in section 54952, subdivision (c)(1)(B).
We
conclude that the open meeting requirements of the Brown Act apply to the meetings of the
governing board of a private, nonprofit corporation formed for the purpose of providing
programming for a cable television channel set aside for educational use by a cable
operator pursuant to its franchise agreement with a city and subsequently designated by
the city to provide the programming services.
2. Public
Records Requirements
The
second question to be resolved is whether the records of the Corporation are subject to
the requirements of the Public Records Act (§ § 6250-6276.48). We conclude that they
are.
Under
the Public Records Act, a state or local public agency is generally required to allow any
member of the public to inspect the records in its custody. (§ § 6250, 6252, 6253; Register
Div. of Freedom Newspaper, Inc. v. County of Orange (1984) 158 Cal.App.3d 893, 901.)
"[A]ccess to information concerning the conduct of the people' s business is a
fundamental and necessary right of every person in this state." (§ 6250; see Times
Mirror Co. v. Superior Court
(1991) 53 Cal.3d 1325, 1338; Wilson v. Superior Court
(1996) 51 Cal.App.4th 1136, 1141.)
Local
public agencies (see § 6252, subd. (d)) that are subject to the public disclosure of
their records are defined in section 6252, subdivision (b), as follows:
"
' Local agency' includes a county; city, whether general law or chartered; city and
county; school district; municipal corporation; district; political subdivision; or any
board, commission or agency thereof; other local public agency; or nonprofit entities that
are legislative bodies of a local agency pursuant to subdivisions (c) and (d) of Section
54952."
The
Corporation meets the test for being a local agency as that term is defined in section
6252. As found in answer to the first question, the Corporation is a nonprofit entity
whose board of directors constitutes a "legislative body" pursuant to section
54952, subdivision (c).[FOOTNOTE
3] Our answer
to the first question thus answers the second question.
We
conclude that the disclosure requirements of the Public Records Act apply to a private,
nonprofit corporation formed for the purpose of providing programming for a cable
television channel set aside for educational use by a cable operator pursuant to its
franchise agreement with a city and subsequently designated by the city to provide the
programming services.
March
18, 2002 CALIFORNIA
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
FOOTNOTE(S) :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
FN1.
The Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984 (47 U.S.C. § § 521-573) authorizes local
governments to require cable operators to enter franchise agreements governing the
operation of their cable systems and to set aside channels for "public, educational,
or governmental use" (47 U.S.C. § § 521, 531) "as part of the consideration an
operator gives in return for permission to install cables under city streets and to use
public rights-of-way" (Denver Area Ed. Telecommunications Consortium, Inc. v. FCC
(1996) 518 U.S. 727, 734 (plur. opn. of Breyer, J.). (See also Gov. Code, § 53066; 46
Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 22, 24 (1965).)
FN2.
All references hereafter to the Government Code are by section number only.
FN3.
Subdivision (d) of section 54952 refers to the lessees of certain hospitals.
|