Preven

Preven v. City of L. A.

Good Law
244 Cal. Rptr. 3d 364·32 Cal. App. 5th 925
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 22, 2019B287559California3,756 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Weingart, J.

*928 This appeal concerns the statutory interpretation of one of the public comment requirements of California's open meeting law, the Ralph M. Brown Act, Government Code section 54950 et seq. 1 Appellant Eric Preven exercised his opportunity to address a meeting of the Los Angeles City Council's Planning and Land Use Management Committee (PLUM). He was then denied the opportunity to address the full city council when it held a special meeting the next day to discuss, among other things, the recommendation arrived at by the PLUM committee.

*929 Asserting the City of Los Angeles's (City) refusal to let him address the special city council meeting was part of a larger pattern of Brown Act violations, Preven sent a cease and desist demand letter to the City. When the City failed to respond to that letter, he filed a petition for a writ of mandate and complaint for declaratory relief to enforce the Brown Act. He further brought a second claim based on the California Public Records Act. ( (CPRA); § 6250 et seq.)

In response to the petition, the City argued the Brown Act requires only the opportunity to address a special meeting of a legislative body before it takes action. Since…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.