SB 1100 Amends Brown Act Authorizing Removal of an Individual for Disrupting a Meeting
On August 22, 2022, Governor Newsom approved Senate Bill 1100 which amended the Ralph M. Brown Act (“Brown Act”). The Brown Act requires all meetings of a local agency’s legislative body to be open and public, with a few specified exceptions. Additionally, the Brown Act requires local agencies to provide an opportunity for members of the public to directly address the legislative body at regular meetings, before or during the body’s consideration of an agenda item. Also, the legislative body is permitted to adopt reasonable regulations to ensure the intent of the public comment requirement provisions is carried out. This can include regulations limiting the total amount of time permitted for public testimony on a particular item and for each speaker.
While the Brown Act already allowed the legislative body to order the meeting room cleared and continue in session if the orderly conduct of a meeting was interrupted and order could not be restored by removal of the interrupting individuals, SB 1100 now authorizes the legislative body’s presiding member or their designee to remove, or have removed, an individual for disrupting a meeting. Disrupting is defined as “engaging in behavior during a meeting of a legislative body that actually disrupts, disturbs, impedes, or renders infeasible the orderly conduct of the meeting” including but not limited to, behavior that, (1) violates the legislative body’s regulations addressing the conduct of open meetings or any other law, or (2) that constitutes use of force or what a reasonable observer would perceive as an actual threat to use force.
Prior to removing an individual, the presiding member or their designee must warn the individual that their behavior is disrupting the meeting and that they may be removed if they do not cease their disrupting behavior. The presiding member or their designee may then remove the individual if they do not promptly cease their disruptive behavior. No warning is required if the disrupting individual is engaging in behavior that constitutes use of force or a true threat of force.
While this bill is intended to regulate the conduct of hostile protestors, such as racist individuals or groups that aggressively oppose the efforts of counties and other governmental entities to address the COVID-19 pandemic, the authors of this column are wary of how it may be misapplied to peaceful labor protests.
For more information, contact your labor law counsel.