[{"_1":2,"_123":-5,"_124":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99,111],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6307402,"mediaKeyId","2433353-7f2ca5d40bced1312c8cb334625051a9","parentId",2433353,"title","Staff cautions officials about social media and ex parte communications in quasi‑judicial matters","audioSeconds",590,"startMs",5441000,"endMs",6031000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2433353-7f2ca5d40bced1312c8cb334625051a9&start=5441&end=6031","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2433353-7f2ca5d40bced1312c8cb334625051a9/thumbnail_5441000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6307402/Capitola-City/Santa-Cruz-County/California/Staff-cautions-officials-about-social-media-and-ex-parte-communications-in-quasijudicial-matters","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6307402-2897de543cee7d11d671aeef41bb5352/orig.mp4?Expires=1771157702&Signature=XiTqYKv4YqDI34QFhl-FcnWI186ABPOKYPfdQkIYkgjRVI1RbDh-FFw3vxqhKAPJoDdtjEeq8RKaZ8DBkUwby1ZvsuBBymslsxG5bcqwq4R3B443RPjV5JnSU6NwTIuHZ8yjaDcfWMp~Vc1t8Yow-wB92APYH6Q-APP98ap0BqUn4LPe4ExcrCNnpRUJsPqE57Hq8~9jl1nY4duopsySBxMokIacpxgZDErQgX5NJ4QEH6BVQe4igdp4zB0lxJvv2OiwNVKVnjW-QcLj0DjAB1YEizer7vYA1FFOpK5FPyz9FdoGlarfkImL4GTepgZP-MyEKo7NuwHJzxRWFJQSmg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City of Capitola, California","date","2025-02-26T00:00:00Z","article","Capitola staff urged elected and appointed officials to distinguish between legislative issues, on which members may freely express opinions, and quasi-judicial matters (permits, appeals) where expressing an opinion on social media or in private communications can create bias or jeopardize a party’s due-process rights.

Chloe, the staff member leading the social-media presentation, told the group city-created content and routine service announcements are encouraged, but posts taking a position on a pending permit or appeal are ‘‘dicey’’ and may require recusal. The presenter warned that online comments and replies can become part of the public record and that ‘‘ex parte’’ communications — contacts outside the public hearing that affect a member’s impartiality — are particularly problematic in adjudicatory contexts.

Why it matters: Planning commissions and councils often decide appeals, permits and variances; when a member states a firm view in advance on a case-specific matter, the decision-maker can be accused of bias, undermining the applicant’s due process protections and triggering disqualification or rehearings.

Presenters recommended officials avoid posting personal positions on quasi-judicial matters before hearings, limit engagement with requests from applicants on private platforms, and use city channels for informational posts. They also advised that comments on legislative matters (for example, general budget priorities) are less likely to require recusal.

Ending: Staff said the city’s code of conduct and social-media policy provide more detail and suggested officials contact the city attorney’s office for advice when unsure whether a post or communication creates an ex parte issue.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Capitola City Council Special Meeting 02/26/2025","oneSentenceSummary","Communications staff and legal counsel reviewed the city social-media policy, advised that city-created posts are acceptable, and warned that expressing opinions on quasi‑judicial matters can create recusal obligations or due-process problems.","taxTitle","Capitola City, Santa Cruz County, California","taxId",68972,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6307407,"Training reviews Rosenberg’s rules, local meeting order, limits on explaining votes and public-comment management",3019,4563000,7582000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2433353-7f2ca5d40bced1312c8cb334625051a9&start=4563&end=7582","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2433353-7f2ca5d40bced1312c8cb334625051a9/thumbnail_4563000.jpg","/articles/6307407/Capitola-City/Santa-Cruz-County/California/Training-reviews-Rosenbergs-rules-local-meeting-order-limits-on-explaining-votes-and-public-comment-management","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6307407-d5bb8ff7f2ccb3c578616b0c235ffc45/orig.mp4?Expires=1771157702&Signature=nZ0TowZF315IHZfZQQf5oEtKy6d~Frg21VeXT5ChsYvk1lEUy67WK2bDlz4Jevbfmznl95JQ0~~0cJQC30iSZ1MuvNfH1DEec53mLgd5kaAmEOS9FlnhvocbYRYe9Wx-nhUktRsNYQoyS7Hu-~bzOMoTaABdessCgKvmj9Hmrr8EtUNb1r4GXmS9RPAN2y6UWPFqkfks-RNPy14diwJjYsG~RGy0uL1Yt5qz-c2kIrs7M-kE2DBvxRt9yfTJTPr3H0uCVul8flS9yGGcBD4GPPWTc-Vjg~DXVq4FKZ61wLWesWI5vFIWC7T6UKVA46MhcBl~1cvDQ6BdvPOkhctwwQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","City legal staff and meeting clerks reviewed Rosenberg’s Rules and local meeting procedures for the Capitola City Council and Planning Commission, demonstrating common motions, amendment practice and how public comment and votes should be handled.

Sam used a benign example to illustrate motion types: ‘‘I move that council host a carnival in April’’ as the base motion, a motion to amend to change the month and a substitute motion as a complete replacement. Trainers explained that the chair takes motions in reverse order (the most recent motion is considered first) and that friendly amendments are common practice when the maker and seconder accept the change.

Presenters also reiterated a municipal-code rule about roll-call votes: members should not explain or condition their votes while the roll is called, and a member may not change a vote after the result is announced. Staff said that if a member believes a vote must be reconsidered, Rosenberg’s rules allow a motion for reconsideration but that it must be made by a member of the prevailing side in the same meeting and under specific conditions.

Public-comment practice and timing were discussed in detail. The city typically permits three minutes per speaker for oral communications and public-hearing items, but the chair may shorten the allotment at the start of the comment period when a large number of speakers is expected, provided the limit is announced and applied uniformly. Staff explained that comments should be directed to the body as a whole rather than to individual commissioners or staff, and that chairs usually close public comment before responding or asking staff to answer clarifying questions.

The training also covered agenda management: how items get placed on agendas (by council members during meeting comments, by city staff, or by the city clerk/manager), the difference between consent items and general-government items, and emergency agenda additions under the Brown Act’s emergency provisions.

Ending: Trainers urged members to follow the outlined procedures to promote clarity, preserve finality of council action, and reduce the risk of procedural challenges.","Presenters walked council and commission members through Rosenberg’s rules for motions, common meeting flow, the municipal-code restriction on explaining votes during roll call, and practical limits on public-comment timing.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6307412,"Legal staff warns officials: conflicts of interest are complex; get advice early, Section 1090 carries harsh penalties",755,3868000,4623000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2433353-7f2ca5d40bced1312c8cb334625051a9&start=3868&end=4623","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2433353-7f2ca5d40bced1312c8cb334625051a9/thumbnail_3868000.jpg","/articles/6307412/Capitola-City/Santa-Cruz-County/California/Legal-staff-warns-officials-conflicts-of-interest-are-complex-get-advice-early-Section-1090-carries-harsh-penalties","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6307412-6a5f2bf7b25ba97000df1e6a7e23f371/orig.mp4?Expires=1771157702&Signature=Q9o2BF7v83xvS78nNCkLXZDq~ThL3e~Fq3zWmLLewemfuoOfMO-kSzTE4mXCRVC4LrQpQnySfE1LbYWWJqN4-oMuYfZGfzYpRolbr~rthKbTHbSV9pOZhvluGx1YDcVcCf8DVM4fjwjlG9IN9LRlNrNBzwxiCfjd~gaWtmksyKoAjzNlNCQA4yWivLTs5~J8bTkh~Fbl9Q-EapTthFRFCi8GkIhKTa3vEVW2LUPlVAnns~nr8FWTth994Q4aZGQbPh9FaGgekjzDc7iTE9~LmXzVO-EizKjf3XiHh1J05UIku86boAaapOftypzwtuve3J0i8~WlGwr6izMQsrbecQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","City Attorney Sam told council members and commissioners that conflict-of-interest rules are legally complex and that officials should seek advice early when a possible conflict arises.

Sam said the city’s office provides legal advice but cannot issue binding conflict determinations — that authority rests with the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC). ‘‘All we give is advice, and so we usually give somewhat conservative advice,’’ Sam said, describing the office’s practice of producing detailed analyses and, in some cases, recommending FPPC guidance when the risk is unclear.

Sam reviewed the ‘‘public generally’’ exception that can allow an official to participate if their financial interest affects them in the same way as a sufficiently large and identifiable segment of the public. He said calculating that exception sometimes requires GIS and mapping work when the affected population must be measured.

The training highlighted Section 1090 (a contractual-conflict rule) as a distinct, rarely used but severe prohibition: if a public official participates in a contract from which they would personally benefit, the contract can be void and the official may face criminal penalties and removal from office. Sam said the consequences for knowingly participating in a Section 1090 conflict are ‘‘harsh’’ and include potential misdemeanor charges and disqualification from future office.

Why it matters: Conflicts can force recusal, change decision-making quorums or require special procedures (for example, ‘‘legally required participation’’ or drawing straws when too many officials are conflicted). Early advice reduces rework and legal risk.

Practical takeaways included notifying the city attorney’s office early if an interest may exist, being careful about text/email exchanges that could create ex parte communications, and recognizing that staff analyses sometimes recommend contacting the FPPC for a formal determination.

Ending: Sam urged officials to inform the city attorney promptly when they suspect a conflict so the office can perform timely, detailed analysis and preserve the city’s decision-making process.","City legal staff explained financial-conflict rules, the public-generally exception, counsel’s advisory role versus FPPC determinations, and the separate, severe contractual prohibition in Section 1090.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6307417,"City attorney urges officials to use city email, explains Public Records Act obligations",622,3356000,3978000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2433353-7f2ca5d40bced1312c8cb334625051a9&start=3356&end=3978","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2433353-7f2ca5d40bced1312c8cb334625051a9/thumbnail_3356000.jpg","/articles/6307417/Capitola-City/Santa-Cruz-County/California/City-attorney-urges-officials-to-use-city-email-explains-Public-Records-Act-obligations","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6307417-06850f3a2fafdcee5d0a9ddb50346a2a/orig.mp4?Expires=1771157702&Signature=W7e7NUUbOHCtI5~i5I4MYMAzaU62wy-vwaMHo~umZwhXyKNoJu2a3IBPOsKIQ~nvKWVg7~OCj55EwLhbuxmWwhGtTaxw9ZvHTnjpD62eWH78JZ2PiSPVLzOZWrxQElUlL4KPfzwO2jvzWzD-xrDgxEU4~~lfSyMkbDjGEP-Ia5CqfiSqz9UOQXuOus-gqfjsbkWD~vDHMMNBQ0cm-q4WylqVSEoU7O5J8kUdgm9A3RPmyRAsfnotPmyc72cECyxvUk6ciBsBUso2Wl31m4eQpMlOZDZ7r6bO2sAJT18ncMDrAXiBuq0rxk6dNWIlxRv3O85RTrq9v4sN9IWH~6-Etg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","City Attorney Sam told the council and planning commissioners that Capitola has seen a marked increase in Public Records Act (PRA) requests and that officials must treat communications about the people’s business as potentially public records.

Sam explained the statutory test: a public record is ‘‘any record containing information relating to the conduct of the people’s business’’ and applies regardless of format or which device or account holds the material. He said that emails or messages on personal accounts or phones are subject to PRA searches ‘‘if it involves city business.’’

Why it matters: A broad PRA search can require staff to collect emails, texts and social-media posts from council and commission members; incomplete disclosures can lead to hurried litigation or writs forcing the city to produce records. Sam said the city often asks officials to sign a declaration verifying they conducted a diligent search for requested material.

Practical guidance from the session included the city’s recommendation that elected and appointed officials use a city-issued email account for city business to simplify searches, and that officials avoid using multiple personal platforms for official communications. Staff outlined which document types are commonly withheld (preliminary drafts, attorney-client privileged materials, personnel records and documents relating to pending litigation), and said withholding requires a recognized exception or privilege.

Sam and staff walked through the PRA response process: staff and IT develop search terms, pull records from city accounts and departments, then ask members to search personal accounts and provide responsive materials. The city then reviews materials for privilege or non-responsiveness before producing records.

Ending: Sam said that, due to the PRA’s remedy (a writ), the city takes requests seriously and asks members to cooperate in a thorough but careful search process.","Legal staff reviewed the Public Records Act and the city’s procedures for searching and producing records, including how texts, personal emails and social-media messages may be public if they relate to city business.",{"_33":112,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":113,"_41":114,"_43":115,"_45":116,"_47":117,"_49":118,"_51":119,"_53":120,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":121,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":122,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6307421,"City attorney outlines Brown Act limits on discussion, removal for disruption and online disorder",800,2059000,2859000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2433353-7f2ca5d40bced1312c8cb334625051a9&start=2059&end=2859","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2433353-7f2ca5d40bced1312c8cb334625051a9/thumbnail_2059000.jpg","/articles/6307421/Capitola-City/Santa-Cruz-County/California/City-attorney-outlines-Brown-Act-limits-on-discussion-removal-for-disruption-and-online-disorder","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6307421-460c8832831a298548fbe79711ff6180/orig.mp4?Expires=1771157702&Signature=dki4eSPHfwVMux0wfgt7P8tSQQOWfsTvFg~mUKZE0Mrf8~-nNTbxlnjdjSwCrQXCYcteJnOhFJI0jFnOdSiQjarqEZD6k5t-nLmX1iPRQly5gguN7v~rwTNiXKR0Bf3B~mkHWZrfqk7r-P48kcNzUF2JjRUOviLW445Z2nM66Rwtr3KYo6rPJWd3LGPFp~qCKbJ-4rQDm8Xh7~9IGtdrTcrdMWtpm6Ok5GPA0Gv2nRUOS3P8b~5dHz1DRvBAIBhOfwAeCBFGJndrZCMoerU2M08y33MoZOSV8mhcWiKMC68cbjUSVGuVX-yrsQPfAhGlmKDtdotHffkcP7FFXMYCzQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","City Attorney Sam told members of the Capitola City Council and Planning Commission that state open-meetings law protects broad public comment but limits removal to conduct that is actually disruptive. Sam said the Brown Act allows members of the public to speak on any item within the body’s subject-matter jurisdiction and that ‘‘you can only remove someone if they’re being actually disruptive.’’

Sam said examples of impermissible removals have reached the courts. He cited litigation following a Santa Cruz meeting in which a speaker performed a Nazi salute and another case in which a school-board meeting included protesters placing trash in the chamber; courts have reached different conclusions depending on whether the person’s conduct actually blocked the legislative body from doing its business.

Why it matters: The guidance clarifies when a Capitola legislative body may curtail speech, close a meeting or direct law enforcement to remove attendees — decisions that can themselves become legal disputes. Officials and staff must balance the public’s right to speak with the council’s duty to conduct its business.

Sam summarized operational points discussed during the training: members may ask people speaking at the dais to identify themselves, but a city cannot impose blanket barriers to public participation; clapping or applause alone is not generally a basis for removal; and members should apply the same standard to all speakers. On remote disruptions such as ‘‘Zoom bombing,’’ Sam said the response depends on whether the conduct relates to an agenda item and whether it is disruptive enough to prevent the meeting from proceeding.

Several commissioners asked procedural questions about handling anticipated disruptions and about how advance coordination with the mayor or chair can reduce risks during a meeting. Sam said it is routine to confer in advance with the mayor if staff anticipates disruptive public comment and that outright removals have been rare in practice.

The training repeatedly stressed that content-based exclusions are impermissible. Sam said officials should focus on conduct that prevents the legislative body from doing its business and follow established notice and warning steps before clearing a chamber or ending a meeting.

The session also touched on how to manage heated public comment: chairs may limit total time or shorten individual time allotments at the start of the public comment period when a large number of speakers is expected, but the chair should set that limit publicly and apply it uniformly.

Ending: Sam encouraged commissioners and council members to raise procedural questions early so staff can prepare guidance in advance of contentious agenda items.","City legal staff reviewed open-meeting rules under the Brown Act, scope of public comment, when officials may stop meetings or remove disruptive attendees, and how courts have treated removals and expressive conduct.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Staff cautions officials about social media and ex parte communications in quasi‑judicial matters

Training reviews Rosenberg’s rules, local meeting order, limits on explaining votes and public-comment management

Legal staff warns officials: conflicts of interest are complex; get advice early, Section 1090 carries harsh penalties

City attorney urges officials to use city email, explains Public Records Act obligations

City attorney outlines Brown Act limits on discussion, removal for disruption and online disorder