Dixon alleges violation of law

Alicia Robinson

Costa Mesa City Councilwoman Linda Dixon has filed a complaint

alleging that three of her colleagues violated the state’s

open-meetings law by passing a note at a May 17 meeting.

Dixon filed the complaint with the city Thursday. In it, she says

that while the council was discussing how to spend $200,000 from a

development agreement with C.J. Segerstrom & Sons, Councilman Eric

Bever wrote a note addressed to Mayor Allan Mansoor and Councilman

Gary Monahan.

“You don’t pass a note with two people’s names on it to two

council members to build a consensus on an issue,” Dixon said Friday.

“I take my job as a council person very seriously, and I felt I was

bothered by this.”

The open-meetings law, the Ralph M. Brown Act, became California

law in 1953. It requires public bodies, such as city councils and

school boards, to announce their meetings in advance, hold them

publicly, and deliberate and vote on most issues in a public forum.

Dixon’s complaint claims the three councilmen used the note to try

to reach consensus about an issue on the agenda and that Mansoor,

when asked about the note, said it was private and threw it away.

One of the councilmen named in the complaint dismissed it as

groundless.

“I think it’s a ridiculous filing,” Monahan said. “I don’t believe

there was any violation.”

Bever could not be reached for comment Friday, and Mansoor

declined to comment until he sees the complaint.

Asked whether he recalled a note being passed at the meeting,

Monahan said he didn’t know. He said he thinks that whatever was

going on is being blown out of proportion.

“If I glanced at something, some notes of Allan’s or something,

and it came from Eric, I wasn’t aware it came from Eric.”

City Atty. Kimberly Hall Barlow said she needs more time to

research the complaint, but the council will have to address the

demand for a cure of the alleged violation at a future meeting,

probably July 19.

“My recommendation will probably be that they go ahead and

reconsider the item in question to eliminate any uncertainty about

its validity,” Barlow said.

The council can take a new vote on the Segerstrom funds, which

were being discussed when the note was passed, without admitting a

Brown Act violation occurred, she said.

Dixon said she thinks the council should revote on the Segerstrom

fund and the following item, a $350,000 donation from IKEA, because

she believes the note pertained to the IKEA funds.

Monahan said he takes offense when people use the council’s 3-2

votes to allege a majority of the council is talking behind the

scenes, which is illegal.

“I’m getting sick and tired of people stating it’s the three guys

against the two girls,” Monahan said. “The fact is, the girls are

much more Democratic and liberal than the boys are, but the fact is,

there are no sneaky, backroom deals or garbage going on.”

Asked whether she thinks other Brown Act violations have been

committed by current council members, Dixon said, “This was so

blatant that one is left to wonder.”

* ALICIA ROBINSON covers government and politics. She may be

reached at (714) 966-4626 or by e-mail at alicia.robinson

@latimes.com.