Experts question council

Experts disagree whether the Costa Mesa City Council violated the Brown Act when members discussed Eric Bever’s mayoral candidacy prior to picking him as the city’s new mayor.

Bever and Councilwoman Katrina Foley said they spoke to former Mayor Allan Mansoor in private before the public council meeting about his support for the new mayor and close political ally. Bever was quick to downplay the significance of the talk.

“Allan asked me if I was willing to step in and take over his position, and certainly that discussion occurred,” Bever said. “From then on, we relied on the public process to arrive at a mayor and mayor pro tem.”

On Wednesday, Mansoor stepped down as mayor. The council chose Bever as the new mayor and Mansoor as the mayor pro tem.

The Brown Act, a complex California law aimed at encouraging transparency in local governments, prohibits serial meetings — the act of privately discussing an agenda item with a majority of council members — that could potentially secure votes for an issue prior to a fair public hearing and input.

With a five-person City Council like Costa Mesa’s, a discussion among three members could raise potential problems, experts familiar with the law said. Council members are legally responsible for halting any talks they suspect may violate such provisions.

“While [this] may not technically violate the Brown Act — the law — the spirit of the law is violated, because the Brown Act was intended to prevent these sorts of discussions from occurring when it pertains to an issue that you have to vote on,” said Terry Francke, general counsel of Californians Aware and an expert on open-meeting laws.

Francke added he thought there were some 1st Amendment issues that may protect the private speech of council members when discussing possible board appointments.

Foley said she was advised by City Atty. Kimberly Barlow that such discussions would fall under the act’s restrictions. Efforts to reach Barlow for comment Friday were unsuccessful.

“It sounds like they came pretty close to the line, if they didn’t just cross it,” Peter Scheer, executive director of the California First Amendment Coalition, said. “If they didn’t actually cross it, then they are lucky — they got too close. They ought to not get so close that it ever becomes a question.”

While Mansoor, Bever and Councilwoman Wendy Leece have characterized Bever’s ascension as a routine reorganization, others see it as an attempt to secure Bever’s reelection this year. The three often form a majority on controversial issues.

Councilwomen Linda Dixon and Leece have said they did not discuss the appointment of mayor and mayor pro tem prior to the meeting Wednesday night.

“Everyone knows I have said Bever would do a good job as Mayor,” Mansoor stated in an e-mailed response to questions about the issue. “Is that really a surprise to anyone?”

CHRIS CAESAR may be reached at (714) 966-4626 or at chris.caesar@latimes.com.