A long Twentynine Palms City Council meeting Tuesday night covered a wide range of topics. Reporter Dan Stork breaks his report into three parts. Today in Part 1: A contentious discussion on potential Brown Act problems, and two items pulled from the consent agenda…
The major item of contention at the meeting of the Twentynine Palms City Council was a resolution described on the agenda as “Reaffirmation of the City Council’s Commitment to comply with the Brown Act.” City Attorney Patrick Munoz explained that the resolution should follow a legal formula intended to “immunize” the City against the cost of what it regards as frivolous lawsuits threatened in reaction to the City’s handling of the departure of former City Manager Richard Warne. The resolution can be paraphrased as follows: “We [the City Council] didn’t do anything wrong, and we won’t do it again.” The lengthy discussion was over whether the language should be focused on the Warne affair, or should be broad enough to cover unspecified Council actions that might have occurred in the past. A 3-2 majority opted for a narrowly-focused version, with Jim Harris and Cora Heiser opposed. Council had begun the business of its open session by removing two items from the consent agenda. Council voted 4-1 (Harris dissenting) to not purchase five acres on the highway for an eventual gateway sign location. A sales price of $12,500 had been negotiated. The other removed item was the Visitor Center contract with the Chamber of Commerce. It was approved unanimously, with a change allowing the Chamber to implement more flexible operating hours, to match highs and lows in the pattern of tourist visits.
TWENTYNINE PALMS CITY COUNCIL PART 1 OF 3: CONTENTION OVER OPEN MEETINGS
