Frustrated by what it characterizes as unequal treatment that violates the law, a homeless advocacy group has sued Orange County officials over their restrictions on public comments at meetings.
The People’s Homeless Task Force, backed by the ACLU of Southern California, filed a lawsuit Tuesday, April 9, alleging the Orange County Board of Supervisors’ rules for comments improperly restrict speakers’ rights under the First Amendment and state open meeting laws, and that the rules are unevenly applied. The suit also argues the county’s public records policies are contrary to state law.
In a statement, county spokeswoman Molly Nicholson said the county has received the suit, but “While we cannot comment on it in its entirety at this time, we do believe that our rules regarding public comment and public records comport with state and federal law.”
Supervisors Andrew Do and Michelle Steel, who are both mentioned by name in the suit, could not be reached for comment Tuesday afternoon.
The lawsuit says county supervisors have discouraged and stifled constituents’ input by holding public comments near the end of their meetings, limiting speakers’ time more than the typical 3 minutes at the mic – even when relatively few people had asked to comment – and treating critical speakers differently than those who praised the board.
Brendan Hamme, an ACLU of Southern California staff attorney, said an example that illustrates the task force’s concerns is a policy that bars speakers from addressing an individual supervisor.
“The First Amendment absolutely protects the right to address government officials, especially with critical comments, and the purpose of meetings as recognized by the board itself is to allow constituents to address their representatives,” Hamme said.
The group also objects to the county’s policy allowing certain records to be destroyed sooner than the two years state law requires most records to be kept, and a policy never to release footage from county security cameras, the suit says.
The ACLU asked the county to address its complaints before filing the suit, Hamme said, but only got an acknowledgement that its email was received. The suit seeks policy changes and money to cover attorney fees.
Such disputes are not uncommon because while people have the right to participate in public meetings of their elected representatives, numerous court decisions have held that reasonable rules can be placed on how and when people exercise that right, said Frank Zerunyan, who teaches governance at USC’s Price School of Public Policy. He is also a Rolling Hills Estates city councilman.
As to how specific officials enforce those rules, and whether they do it fairly, Zerunyan said, it’s often “like beauty – it’s in the eye of the beholder.”
