By Aria Jalan
SACRAMENTO, CA – The First Amendment Coalition (FAC) has issued an opposition letter to AB 817, California legislation that FAC argues would significantly weaken open-meetings protections by allowing government officials to avoid in-person attendance at public meetings.
AB 817, introduced by Assemblymember Blanca Pacheco (D-Downey), proposes certain government bodies can conduct all public meetings virtually without the need for an emergency or specific personal circumstances, notes FAC.
The FAC asserts this shift would undermine face-to-face accountability, which is crucial for transparent governance.
“The bill would write into the Brown Act an unprecedented level of remoteness to public meetings,” said FAC Advocacy Director Ginny LaRoe, adding, “This includes meetings held by critical bodies such as a new police oversight commission in Vallejo, a controversial civilian elections committee in Shasta County, and a budget committee in San Diego.”
LaRoe argued the potential impact on community engagement and journalistic accountability, stating, “Consider what an all-virtual government meeting means for community members who make their voices heard using tried-and-true tactics like holding signs, wearing matching shirts or buttons, staging protests, or even holding eye contact with officials.
“And what it means for journalists who do the important work of keeping Californians informed: When public meetings go entirely online, how can a reporter approach an official for comment or connect with community members who have views on issues being considered?”
Current state law, as outlined in the Brown Act, already allows for significant flexibility for remote participation by officials, provided certain conditions are met, such as informing the public of the official’s location.
However, LaRoe emphasized that the law does not mandate virtual access for the public, except under limited circumstances. The FAC has urged the CA Legislature to enhance public virtual participation options, but contends that AB 817 does not achieve this goal.
“AB 817 doesn’t increase public access. It offers an unfair trade-off: Let officials avoid appearing in person in order for the public to have a right to a livestream,” LaRoe explained.
FAC is calling on concerned Californians to voice their opposition to AB 817 and advocate for public meetings to be held in accessible public places.
