RED BLUFF, Calif. — Council Member and former Mayor Pro Tem Daniele Eyestone submitted a letter to the Tehama County District Attorney detailing alleged Brown Act and city municipal code violations against the City Council and acting City Attorney and Manager Richard Crabtree during a closed session meeting on June 25, 2021.
The Tehama County District Attorney's office said they reviewed Eyestone's allegations and ultimately did not find the actions of the Red Bluff City Council or the Red Bluff City Manager violated either the Brown Act or the Red Bluff Municipal Code.
In a response to the letter, Tehama County District Attorney Matthew Rogers said:
"Based on our review of this matter, no discernable Brown Act violation has been discovered by this Office with respect to the allegations outlined in your letter. The authority cited in your letter, Gillespie v. San Francisco Public Library Commission, does not stand for the proposition argues, nor does California Attorney General Opinion 85 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 77 (2002). This office can find no authority to support your contention that the City Council, '...may only meet in closed session to interview and discuss employees to which the City Council has direst authority.' Nothing noted in the Brown Act itself, nor subsequent court interpretation, would suggest that 'direct authority; is a triggering requirement for the City Council involvement in such matters."
District Attorney Rogers continues in response to the alleged city municipal code violations:
"...this Office has concluded that no such violation was committed. As was done in this matter, the City Manager, as Personnel Officer, may delegate duties to any officer or employee of the City pursuant to City Code Section 2.78(a). The potential candidate for Community Development Director could certainly meet with the Red Bluff City Council in closed session as part of the hiring process while not running afoul of either the Brown Act or the Red Bluff Municipal Code."