Ralph M. Brown Act:
Meeting Notices and Agendas
Return to main menu
Q: Even if governmental meetings are open and public, how are
citizens to know when, where and why they are being held?
Q: Can one just be put on a mailing list for meeting
announcements?
Q: Isn't this section a bit confusing?
Q: What should one do who wants to be personally alerted to
meeting announcements?
Q: What governs how far in advance a meeting agenda must be
posted?
Q: What are the rules for creating and posting agendas of
regular meetings?
Q: Can the agenda be simply put up on the interior bulletin
board of a public building?
Q: Does the agenda have to provide elaborate summaries of the
business to be taken up?
Q: Has a court ever rejected a particular agenda description as
legally inadequate?
Q: What lesson should public agencies take from the Carlson
case?
Q: Can an agenda description be so general as to be legally
unacceptable?
Q: Does the agenda have to give notice of every possible
outcome that might occur with respect to a given item?
Q: If an item keeps being dealt with from meeting to meeting,
does the agenda description have to be updated to reflect new possibilities?
Q: What if a body takes action on an item that is not on the
agenda at all?
Q: What kind of leeway does the Act allow a body's members to
bring up non-agendized matters?
Q: What is "special" about a special meeting?
Q: Does a news organization really have to make an explicit
request to be notified of special meetings? If it does so, must it be alerted to every
special meeting?
Q: What kind of "emergency" dispenses with the need
for written notice?
Q: What guidance should the news media draw from these rules?
Q: What issues call for the most demanding notice procedures
under the Act?
Q: What are the notice requirements relevant to proposed new
taxes?
Q: What are the notice requirements relevant to proposed new
assessments?
Q: Do these special procedures replace the need for adequate
agenda descriptions?
Q: When are these special procedures not required? What can a
body do to economize on time and the cost of the notices?
Q: How does the Brown Act address situations when an item on
the agenda has to be postponed to a later time?
Q: What is the difference between an adjournment and a
continuance?
Q: Even if governmental meetings are open and public, how are
citizens to know when, where and why they are being held?
A: The Brown Act includes a variety of provisions to ensure that citizens -- either
directly or with the aid of the news media -- may learn in advance when and where official
meetings are scheduled and what business they will deal with.
Back to top
Q: Can one just be put on a mailing list for meeting
announcements?
A: Yes. The most personalized notice, provided for in Government Code §54954.1, is one
which any person may request to have mailed to him or her individually, based on a fee to
cover copying and postage costs.
The legislative body which is subject to the provisions of this chapter shall give
mailed notice of every regular meeting, and any special meeting which is called at least
one week prior to the date set for the meeting, to any person who has filed a written
request for that notice with the legislative body. Any mailed notice required pursuant to
this section shall be mailed at least one week prior to the date set for the meeting to
which it applies except that the legislative body may give the notice as it deems
practical of special meetings called less than seven days prior to the date set for the
meeting. Any request for notice filed pursuant to this section shall be valid for one year
from the date on which it is filed unless a renewal request is filed. Renewal requests for
notice shall be filed within 90 days after January 1 of each year. The failure of any
person to receive the notice given pursuant to this section shall not constitute grounds
for any court to invalidate the actions of the legislative body for which the notice was
given. The legislative body may establish a reasonable annual fee for sending the notice
based on the estimated cost of providing the service.
Back to top
Q: Isn't this section a bit confusing?
A: Yes -- for both the agency in question and its consituency. Read literally, Section
54954.1 requires that a "notice" requested by a citizen must be mailed at least
a week before the meeting it announces. There is allowance made for special meetings that
are not called until within a week before they are to occur, but otherwise the rule is
seven days. The timing for the posting of the specific agenda for a regular meeting (see
below) is 72 hours in advance, and that appears to be the real deadline which most local
agencies observe for completing the agenda. No doubt they might prefer that the mailing
date deadline be three days as well, but that would often mean that the notice would not
be in the requester's hands until the day of the meeting, or even later, in view of how
many local agencies post their agendas on a Friday for a meeting to be held Monday evening
or Tuesday.
Back to top
Q: What should one do who wants to be personally alerted to
meeting announcements?
A: Citizens who mean to keep a close eye on a particular agency's coming meetings
should probably not rely on this section if the agency meets weekly. Even if it meets only
monthly, the agency is not prevented from departing from a mailed "notice" as
such and, for example, adding new items. As noted below, that restriction applies only to
the posted agenda. The most reliable procedure, although involving more initiative and
effort, would be to arrange to have a copy of the agenda set aside to be picked up (or
mailed, if the risk of a late delivery is absent) on the day it is posted.
Back to top
Q: What governs how far in advance a meeting agenda must be
posted?
A: The rules for impersonal or general notice of meetings vary depending on whether the
meeting is "regular" -- occurring on a fixed schedule and at a sixed location
formally adopted by the agency -- or "special" -- at some time or place
differing from the regular policy -- or "emergency" -- called in response to a
particular threat to public health and safety.
Back to top
Q: What are the rules for creating and posting agendas of regular
meetings?
A: The rule for regular meetings is stated in subdivision (a) of Government Code §
54954.2:
At least 72 hours before a regular meeting, the legislative body of the local agency,
or its designee, shall post an agenda containing a brief general description of each item
of business to be transacted or discussed at the meeting, including items to be discussed
in closed session. A brief general description of an item generally need not exceed 20
words. The agenda shall specify the time and location of the regular meeting and shall be
posted in a location that is freely accessible to members of the public.
Back to top
Q: Can the agenda be simply put up on the interior bulletin board
of a public building?
A: Probably not. The law requires the posting of no more than one copy of the agenda,
but that copy at least must be posted where it is "freely accessible to" the
public. It must therefore be visible outside office hours, otherwise there would be little
point in specifying the 72-hour period or in requiring posting at all; it could be placed
on a counter or supplied on request by a clerk. This point is especially important in view
of the common practice of agencies that meet weekly on a Monday or Tuesday, in which case
more than half of the 72 hour period is consumed by the weekend.
Back to top
Q: Does the agenda have to provide elaborate summaries of the
business to be taken up?
A: No. The "brief general description" can be just that -- brief and general,
usually satisfied within 20 words -- but it must be a description, not a code phrase
unintelligible to the public, or an empty category label appearing without further
elaboration on every agenda. As stated in several recent editions of the Attorney General's guide to
these laws : "The purpose of the brief general description is to inform interested
members of the public about the subject matter under consideration so that they can
determine whether to monitor or participate in the meeting of the body." (Id., page
16) This does not mean that the agenda description need educate the reader about all
aspects of an item - such would often be impossible in any "brief" or
"general" way, and the law clearly assumes that citizens who have a particular
interest in a given subject matter will take steps to find out more about the proposal in
advance, or to attend the meeting, or both. But it does mean, among other things, that
when it is possible to use a few words to alert the public to an obviously consequential
or controversial proposal, a failure to do just that may violate the law if its effect to
leave those most likely to care unaware and with lowered guard.
Back to top
Q: Has a court ever rejected a particular agenda description as
legally inadequate?
A: Yes. The defining example of this phenomenon involved not the Brown Act but a
comparable public notice provision of the Education Code, which if anything was
considerably less demanding than the current Brown Act language; all it required was the
posting of "a list of items that will constitute the agenda." A school board
listed "Continuation school site change" and no more as one item, but the
literally hidden agenda - accomplished at that meeting and never voluntarily revisited
despite parents' immediate entreaties - was not only to shift the continuation program to
an elementary school campus but to shift the elementary students elsewhere. The California
Court of Appeal, upholding a trial court order invalidating the board's action, remarked
that the "school site change" listing
...was entirely inadequate notice to a citizenry which may have been concerned over a
school closure. On this point alone, the agenda item, while not deceitful, was
entirely misleading and inadequate to show the whole scope of the board's intended plans.
It would have taken relatively little effort to add to the agenda that this "school
site change" also included the discontinuance of elementary education at Canyon View
and the transfer of those students to Ponderosa School. Carlson v. Paradise Unified School
District, 18 Cal.App.3d 196, 200 (1971)(emphasis in the original)
Back to top
Q: What lesson should public agencies take from the Carlson case?
A: The Carlson court, in focusing on the "citizenry which may have been
concerned" as the audience which precisely should have been alerted, underscores the
importance of doing something that probably comes to public officials with difficulty --
attending to the most politically sensitive or conflict-prone aspects of a proposed
action, and instead of trying to lowball them, actually flagging them on the agenda to
give opponents fair warning. While doing so may arm adversaries' political resistance in
the short run, the alternative runs the risk of both political repercussions and
litigation costs and consequences.
Back to top
Q: Can an agenda description be so general as to be legally
unacceptable?
A: Vague generalized language is insufficient if it fails to communicate the essence of
a specific and unusual proposal. A school board agenda item worded "Resolution
Regarding Certificated Employees", stated the California Court of Appeal, "could
have referred to any number of routine resolutions concerning certificated empoyees and
cannot be said to have given fair warning" of what was actually on the table --
"that a reduction in staff or termination of employees would be considered."
Campbell Elementary Teachers Association v. Abbott, 76 Cal.App.3d 796 (1978)).
Back to top
Q: Does the agenda have to give notice of every possible outcome
that might occur with respect to a given item?
A: If a proposal is sufficiently well described, the agenda need not predict the
precise action the body might take. "The agenda item made it clear", stated the
California Court of Appeal in Phillips v. Seely, 43 Cal. App. 3d 104 (1974), "that
the board was to hear and consider an offer to supply public defender services to the
county...where the subject matter to be considered is sufficiently defined to apprise the
public of the matter to be considered and notice has been given in the manner required by
law, the governing body is not required to give further special notice of what action it
might take."
Back to top
Q: If an item keeps being dealt with from meeting to meeting,
does the agenda description have to be updated to reflect new possibilities?
A: Truly novel developments should be highlighted. If several concrete options for a
proposed school desegregation plan have been defined through previous meetings and
hearings, the California Supreme Court has held, an agenda item which refers specifically
to those options is misleading for a meeting at which a new option is presented with
significantly different consequences, such as school closures never before contemplated.
Moreover, the fact that the new option and the staff's intention to air it at the meeting
have received considerable media publicity does not absolve the misleading character of
the agenda, which nevertheless refers only to the first three options. Santa Barbara
School District v. Superior Court, 13 Cal.3d 315 (1975).
Back to top
Q: What if a body takes action on an item that is not on the
agenda at all?
A: Even the clearest agenda language is of limited use to the public if, at the
meeting, the body is free to take action on business not listed at all. The rest of
Government Code § 54954.2 attempts to preclude unwarranted surprise action or even
extensive discussion by the members of a non-agendized item, while allowing flexibility to
address unforeseen and urgent matters.
No action or discussion shall be undertaken on any item not appearing on the posted
agenda, except that members of a legislative body or its staff may briefly respond to
statements made or questions posed by persons exercising their public testimony rights
under Section 54954.3. In addition, on their own initiative, or in response to questions
posed by the public, a member of a legislative body or its staff may ask a question for
clarification, make a brief announcement, or make a brief report of his or her own
activities. Furthermore, a member of the legislative body, or the body itself, subject to
rules and procedures of the legislative body, may provide a reference to staff or other
resources for factual information, request staff to report back to the body at a
subsequent meeting concerning any matter or take action to direct staff to place a matter
of business on a future agenda.
(b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), the legislative body may take action on items of
business not appearing on the posted agenda under any of the conditions stated below.
Prior to discussing any item pursuant to this subdivision, the legislative body shall
publicly identify the item.
(1) Upon a determination by a majority vote of the legislative body that an emergency
situation exists, as defined in Section 54956.5.
(2) Upon a determination by a two-thirds vote of the legislative body, or, if less than
two-thirds of the members are present, a unanimous vote of those members present, that
there is a need to take immediate action and that the need for action came to the
attention of the local agency subsequent to the agenda being posted as specified in
subdivision (a).
(3) The item was posted pursuant to subdivision (a) for a prior meeting of the
legislative body occurring not more than five calendar days prior to the date action is
taken on the item, and at the prior meeting the item was continued to the meeting at which
action is being taken.
Back to top
Q: What kind of leeway does the Act allow a body's members to
bring up non-agendized matters?
A: On the one hand, members of the body may provide brief informational reports on
their own personal activities, make announcements, and interact with public speakers and
staff for informational or procedural purposes, including the addition of an item to a
future agenda. On the other hand, they may not indulge in policy discussions or take
substantive action of any kind on a non-agendized item without making certain findings by
a specified vote.
The first situation is one of "emergency", within the narrow meaning
discussed below, that would justify a meeting on one hour's notice to the media; here the
body must find by a majority vote that there exists a condition of disruption to public
facilities that "severely impairs" public health, safety or both.
The more conventional second situation -- but if properly observed, still quite rare --
is where the body is able to find, by a supermajority or unanimous vote, that immediate
action is required by an exigency unknown to the agency at the time the agenda was posted.
Only one case has addressed how pressing such urgency must be, but it illustrates that
upon challenge, courts are free to conclude that a body's voted finding of the need for
immediate action was contrary to fact and inadequate as a matter of law. The California
Court of Appeal has concluded that a bona fide "urgent action" situation does
not arise simply because a crowd at a city council clamors for the overturn of an
unpopular planning commission ruling not included on the agenda, especially where the
council knew in advance that the ruling was controversial and that time was running out to
appeal it (Cohan v. City of Thousand Oaks, 30 Cal.App.4th 547, 556 (1994)).
Back to top
Q: What is "special" about a special meeting?
A: If a body needs to discuss or act on a matter that it deems pressing enough not to
wait fora regular meeting, or an issue that deserves extensive consideration without the
press of other business, or if it needs to convene at some place other than its adopted
meeting site, it may depart from its regular calendar and meet at some other time or
place. The rules for notice of such special meetings are in Government Code § 54956.
A special meeting may be called at any time by the presiding officer of the legislative
body of a local agency, or by a majority of the members of the legislative body, by
delivering personally or by mail written notice to each member of the legislative body and
to each local newspaper of general circulation, radio or television station requesting
notice in writing. The notice shall be delivered personally or by mail and shall be
received at least 24 hours before the time of the meeting as specified in the notice. The
call and notice shall specify the time and place of the special meeting and the business
to be transacted. No other business shall be considered at these meetings by the
legislative body. The written notice may be dispensed with as to any member who at or
prior to the time the meeting convenes files with the clerk or secretary of the
legislative body a written waiver of notice. The waiver may be given by telegram. The
written notice may also be dispensed with as to any member who is actually present at the
meeting at the time it convenes. Notice shall be required pursuant to this section
regardless of whether any action is taken at the special meeting. The call and notice
shall be posted at least 24 hours prior to the special meeting in a location that is
freely accessible to members of the public.
Back to top
Q: Does a news organization really have to make an explicit
request to be notified of special meetings? If it does so, must it be alerted to every
special meeting?
A: The Attorney General has concluded that a newspaper or broadcast station need not
receive the written notice unless it has submitted a written request for such alerts (62
Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen 658 (1979), but that if such a request has been submitted, the fact
that the meeting will consist entirely of a closed session does not excuse the notice (43
Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 79 (1960).
Back to top
Q: What kind of "emergency" dispenses with the need for
written notice?
A: The briefest period of advance notice is for an "emergency" meeting, with
rules prescribed in Government Code § 54956.5:
In the case of an emergency situation involving matters upon which prompt action is
necessary due to the disruption or threatened disruption of public facilities, a
legislative body may hold an emergency meeting without complying with either the 24-hour
notice requirement or the 24-hour posting requirement of Section 54956 or both of the
notice and posting requirements.
For purposes of this section, "emergency situation" means any of the
following:
(a) Work stoppage or other activity which severely impairs public health, safety, or
both, as determined by a majority of the members of the legislative body. (b) Crippling
disaster which severely impairs public health, safety, or both, as determined by a
majority of the members of the legislative body.
However, each local newspaper of general circulation and radio or television station
which has requested notice of special meetings pursuant to Section 54956 shall be notified
by the presiding officer of the legislative body, or designee thereof, one hour prior to
the emergency meeting by telephone and all telephone numbers provided in the most recent
request of such newspaper or station for notification of special meetings shall be
exhausted. In the event that telephone services are not functioning, the notice
requirements of this section shall be deemed waived, and the legislative body, or designee
of the legislative body, shall notify those newspapers, radio stations, or television
stations of the fact of the holding of the emergency meeting, the purpose of the meeting,
and any action taken at the meeting as soon after the meeting as possible.
Notwithstanding Section 54957, the legislative body shall not meet in closed session
during a meeting called pursuant to this section.
All special meeting requirements, as prescribed in Section 54956 shall be applicable to
a meeting called pursuant to this section, with the exception of the 24-hour notice
requirement.
The minutes of a meeting called pursuant to this section, a list of persons who the
presiding officer of the legislative body, or designee of the legislative body, notified
or attempted to notify, a copy of the rollcall vote, and any actions taken at the meeting
shall be posted for a minimum of 10 days in a public place as soon after the meeting as
possible.
Back to top
Q: What guidance should the news media draw from these rules?
A: The extreme newsworthiness of the issues addressed in an emergency meeting -- public
employee walkouts, riots, man-made or natural disasters -- dictate that any news
organization expecting to cover the full dimension of such occurences should have a letter
on file with the relevant public agencies not only requesting notice of special meetings
called under Government Code Section 54956 but also providing a list of phone and fax
numbers for use in the one-hour alerts prior to emergency meetings. Another point making
it worthwhile to be informed of these meetings is that, unlike regular or special
sessions, they must be entirely public -- no closed door discussions are permitted.
Back to top
Q: What issues call for the most demanding notice procedures
under the Act?
A: The most comprehensive notice mandate in the Brown Act, requiring both general
notification to the community and direct written contacts with affected individuals, is
required when an agency is contemplating imposing new revenue burdens on the public. The
procedures, which call for both a "meeting" and a separate "hearing"
on a proposed new or increased general tax or assessment, are described in Government Code
Section 54954.6:
(a) (1) Before adopting any new or increased general tax or any new or increased
assessment, the legislative body of a city, county, special district, or joint powers
authority shall conduct at least one public meeting at which local officials must allow
public testimony regarding the proposed new or increased general tax or new or increased
assessment in addition to the noticed public hearing at which the legislative body
proposes to enact or increase the general tax or assessment....
(2) The legislative body shall provide at least 45 days' public notice of the public
hearing at which the legislative body proposes to enact or increase the general tax or
assessment. The legislative body shall provide notice for the public meeting at the same
time and in the same document as the notice for the public hearing, but the meeting shall
occur prior to the hearing.
Back to top
Q: What are the notice requirements relevant to proposed new
taxes?
A: The notice regarding a tax involves both a newspaper advertisement and a personal
mailing to any taxpayer who has gone on record requesting it:
(b) (1) The joint notice of both the public meeting and the public hearing required by
subdivision (a) with respect to a proposal for a new or increased general tax shall be
accomplished by placing a display advertisement of at least one-eighth page in a newspaper
of general circulation for three weeks pursuant to Section 6063 and by a first-class
mailing to those interested parties who have filed a written request with the local agency
for mailed notice of public meetings or hearings on new or increased general taxes. The
public meeting pursuant to subdivision (a) shall take place no earlier than 10 days after
the first publication of the joint notice pursuant to this subdivision. The public hearing
shall take place no earlier than seven days after the public meeting pursuant to this
subdivision. Notwithstanding paragraph (2) of subdivision (a), the joint notice need not
include notice of the public meeting after the meeting has taken place. The public hearing
pursuant to subdivision (a) shall take place no earlier than 45 days after the first
publication of the joint notice pursuant to this subdivision. The public hearing shall
take place no earlier than seven days after the public meeting pursuant to this
subdivision. Any written request for mailed notices shall be effective for one year from
the date on which it is filed unless a renewal request is filed. Renewal requests for
mailed notices shall be filed on or before April 1 of each year. The legislative body may
establish a reasonable annual charge for sending notices based on the estimated cost of
providing the service.
(2) The notice required by paragraph (1) of this subdivision shall include, but not be
limited to, the following:
(A) The amount or rate of the tax. If the tax is proposed to be increased from any
previous year, the joint notice shall separately state both the existing tax rate and the
proposed tax rate increase.
(B) The activity to be taxed.
(C) The estimated amount of revenue to be raised by the tax annually.
(D) The method and frequency for collecting the tax.
(E) The dates, times, and locations of the public meeting and hearing described in
subdivision (a).
(F) The phone number and address of an individual, office, or organization that
interested persons may contact to receive additional information about the tax.
Back to top
Q: What are the notice requirements relevant to proposed new
assessments?
A: The notice regarding an assessment involves a personal mailing to all affected
property owners on the assessment roll:
(c) (1) The joint notice of both the public meeting and the public hearing required by
subdivision (a) with respect to a proposal for a new or increased assessment on real
property shall be accomplished through a mailing, postage prepaid, in the United States
mail and shall be deemed given when so deposited. The public meeting pursuant to
subdivision (a) shall take place no earlier than 10 days after the joint mailing pursuant
to this subdivision. The public hearing shall take place no earlier than seven days after
the public meeting pursuant to this subdivision. The envelope or the cover of the mailing
shall include the name of the local agency and the return address of the sender. This
mailed notice shall be in at least 10-point type and shall be given to all property owners
proposed to be subject to the new or increased assessment by a mailing by name to those
persons whose names and addresses appear on the last equalized county assessment roll or
the State Board of Equalization assessment roll, as the case may be.
(2) The joint notice required by paragraph (1) of this subdivision shall include, but
not be limited to, the following:
(A) The estimated amount of the assessment per parcel. If the assessment is proposed to
be increased from any previous year, the joint notice shall separately state both the
amount of the existing assessment and the proposed assessment increase.
(B) A general description of the purpose or improvements that the assessment will fund.
(C) The address to which property owners may mail a protest against the assessment.
(D) The phone number and address of an individual, office, or organization that
interested persons may contact to receive additional information about the assessment.
(E) A statement that a majority protest will cause the assessment to be abandoned if
the assessment act used to levy the assessment so provides. Notice must also state the
percentage of protests required to trigger an election, if applicable.
(F) The dates, times, and locations of the public meeting and hearing described in
subdivision (a).
(3) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), in the case of an assessment which is proposed
exclusively for operation and maintenance expenses for an entire city, county, or
district, or operation and maintenance assessments proposed to be levied on 50,000 parcels
or more, notice may be provided pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) and shall
include the information required by paragraph (2) of subdivision (c).
(4) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), in the case of an assessment proposed to be levied
pursuant to Part 2 (commencing with Section 22500) of Division 2 of the Streets and
Highways Code by a regional park district, regional park and open-space district, or
regional open-space district formed pursuant to Article 3 (commencing with Section 5500)
of Chapter 3 of Division 5 of, or pursuant to Division 26 (commencing with Section 35100)
of, the Public Resources Code, notice may be provided pursuant to paragraph (1) of
subdivision (b).
Back to top
Q: Do these special procedures replace the need for adequate
agenda descriptions?
A: No, agenda descriptions are still required. The section provides:
(d) The notice requirements imposed by this section shall be construed as additional
to, and not to supersede, existing provisions of law, and shall be applied concurrently
with the existing provisions so as to not delay or prolong the gov ernmental
decisionmaking process.
Back to top
Q: When are these special procedures not required? What can a
body do to economize on time and the cost of the notices?
A: The section allows some flexibility as follows:
(e) This section shall not apply to any new or increased general tax or any new or
increased assessment that requires an election of either of the following:
(1) The property owners subject to the assessment.
(2) The voters within the city, county, special district, or joint powers authority
imposing the tax or assessment.
(f) Nothing in this section shall prohibit a local agency from holding a consolidated
meeting or hearing at which the legislative body discusses multiple tax or assessment
proposals.
(g) The local agency may recover the reasonable costs of public meetings, public
hearings, and notice required by this section from the proceeds of the tax or assessment.
The costs recovered for these purposes, whether recovered pursuant to this subdivision or
any other provision of law, shall not exceed the reasonable costs of the public meetings,
public hearings, and notice.
Back to top
Q: How does the Brown Act address situations when an item on the
agenda has to be postponed to a later time?
A: The Act's final notice provisions deal with procedures for alerting the public that
a meeting has been ajourned, or a hearing continued, to a later time. Ironically, those
present at the time of adjournment or continuance probably do not need notice other than
that announced by the chair, while those absent at that point will have no reason to
inquire or check for a posted notice.
Back to top
Q: What is the difference between an adjournment and a
continuance?
A: A meeting as a whole is said to be adjourned, while a public hearing on a specific
matter, scheduled for public comment at a fixed time on the agenda, is said to be
continued. The Act differentiates the required notice procedures as follows:
Government Code § 54955. The legislative body ... may adjourn any regular, adjourned
regular, special or adjourned special meeting to a time and place specified in the order
of adjournment. Less than a quorum may so adjourn from time to time. If all members are
absent from any regular or adjourned regular meeting the clerk or secretary of the ...
body may declare the meeting adjourned to a stated time and place and he shall cause a
written notice of the adjournment to be given in the same manner as provided in Section
54956 for special meetings, unless such notice is waived as provided for special meetings.
A copy of the order or notice ... shall be conspicuously posted on or near the door of the
place where the ... meeting was held within 24 hours after the time of the adjournment.
When a regular or adjourned regular meeting is adjourned as provided in this section, the
resulting adjourned regular meeting is a regular meeting for all purposes. When an order
of adjournment of any meeting fails to state the hour at which the adjourned meeting is to
be held, it shall be held at the hour specified for regular meetings by ordinance,
resolution, bylaw, or other rule.
Government Code § 54955.1. Any hearing being held, or noticed or ordered to be held,
by a legislative body of a local agency at any meeting may by order or notice of
continuance be continued or recontinued to any subsequent meeting of the legislative body
in the same manner and to the same extent set forth in Section 54955 for the adjournment
of meetings; provided, that if the hearing is continued to a time less than 24 hours after
the time specified in the order or notice of hearing, a copy of the order or notice of
continuance of hearing shall be posted immediately following the meeting at which the
order or declaration of continuance was adopted or made.
