Letters Detail Resident’s Gripe With Arcadia Council Over Alleged Transparency Law Violations

Roger Chandler. – File Photo by Terry Miller

By Joe Taglieri

Arcadia City Council members voted unanimously in a June 16 open session to authorize Mayor Gary Kovacic to sign and send a response to a resident who within the last two months has twice written to the city detailing alleged state transparency law violations.

David Arvizu is suing the City Council in an attempt to block residential construction projects in the Highlands neighborhood and recently threatened another lawsuit after the council made several policy decisions behind closed doors during a May 5 nonpublic meeting.

In that closed session, a 3-2 majority opted to shelve a citywide zoning code update and related residents advisory committee as well as exclude the Highlands, where Arvizu resides, from a forthcoming historical preservation survey.

Central to Arvizu’s argument that the council violated the state’s Ralph M. Brown Act is his claim that the city failed to provide adequate public notice indicating the May 5 meeting was a continuance of the council’s April 7 closed session, and that it had changed venues from the Council Chamber Conference Room to a location at the nearby Arcadia Police Department.

“Additionally, the May 5 special meeting agenda was not posted on the City’s website, nor were people who had signed up to receive notices and agendas provided with information about the meeting,” according to a letter Arvizu hand-delivered at the June 2 regular council meeting. “During closed session, the Council discussed and took action on items outside of the specific litigation noticed, including decisions regarding the Mills Act, the historical survey, and zoning code updates.

“None of these items were included on either the April 7 agenda, nor were they listed on the notice of continuance,” the letter continues. “This robbed interested persons of notice and opportunity to be heard on these important decisions, a right which is guaranteed by the Brown Act.”

Arvizu’s June 2 letter demanded the council rescind its closed-session actions and announce how each council member voted.

Kovacic’s June 17 letter pledges – though without admitting legal miscues – that the council will not repeat the following alleged Brown Act infractions: “discussing and taking action on items not listed on the agenda during a special meeting” and “discussing items during a closed session on pending litigation that are outside the scope of the litigation.”

The mayor also responded that the city’s public notices of the closed session continuance and location change were Brown Act-compliant.

John Wuo. – File Photo by Terry Miller

“Within 24 hours following the City Council’s order of continuance” of the closed session, public notices were “posted at or near the door of the Executive Conference Room,” the mayor’s letter states.

“Subsequently, when it was determined that the City Council would be meeting at 4 p.m. on May 5 for a special meeting (budget workshop) normally conducted at the Police Department Headquarters on the civic center campus, the City posted notice on April 21 of the changed location … so that [the continued closed session] could take place at the same location as the budget workshop,” the letter continues, further stating that in addition to the police department notices were posted at the three locations where the city regularly places announcements and public meeting agendas.

Kovacic also wrote that there is no Brown Act requirement to post notices of continued council meetings on a city’s website as long as the initial meeting was announced online.

“It should once again be noted that it was publicly reported in the televised open session of the April 7 … City Council regular meeting that the [closed session] meeting begun earlier that evening was continued to … May 5,” the mayor added.

Though Kovacic’s letter admits no Brown Act violations, in an attempt to satisfy Arvizu’s demands and avoid another lawsuit filing the council on June 16 rescinded its closed-session actions.

City Attorney Stephen Deitsch also announced each council member’s May 5 vote, confirming the vote record Arcadia Weekly reported in a story initially published May 6 on the newspaper’s website.

Pending the completion of a lawsuit Arvizu and his group Save the Arcadia Highlands filed in March that aims to halt two council-approved construction projects in which developers seek to replace mid-20th century homes with significantly larger dwellings, Kovacic and council members Tom Beck and Sho Tay voted to move forward with historical preservation excluding the Highlands. Mayor Pro Tem Roger Chandler and Council Member John Wuo decided against the motion.

Tay, Wuo, and Chandler also voted to shelve the zoning update and neighborhood committee, with Kovacic and Beck dissenting.

In the June 16 public vote tally, which was essentially a do-over of the nonpublic balloting in May, council members mirrored their 3-2 split on suspending the zoning code update.

Chandler, Wuo, and Tay also defeated a motion by Kovacic and Beck to only suspend a residential zoning update and continue the process for the city’s commercial properties.

There was, however, a slight change regarding the historical survey.

Beck and Kovacic proposed moving forward with historical preservation that includes the Highlands, while Chandler, backed by Wuo and Tay, chose to proceed without the Highlands until the litigation finishes.

Arvizu said in an email to Arcadia Weekly on Tuesday that he would not further pursue a Brown Act lawsuit and may initiate a recall election against Chandler, Wuo, and Tay.

“I am glad that the issue could be brought out of the shadows and that the citizens of Arcadia could witness the process for themselves,” Arvizu said, adding that “With each councilman explaining why they voted the way they did, we achieved our goal.”

Sho Tay. – File Photo by Terry Miller

More from Arcadia Weekly