A revision to a proposed Fresno City Council ordinance would no longer punish recipients of leaked confidential information emanating from City Hall.
Following criticism from First Amendment groups, a new version released Tuesday would still hold current and former city employees accountable (including elected leaders) for unauthorized disclosure of confidential information. However, a section regarding punishing those who receive such information is no longer part of the ordinance’s language.
Listen to this article:
Also added are whistleblower protections shielding the release of confidential information “if an official or employee believes there is a legal violation,” and the employee only discusses the matter with law enforcement. It also exempts punishment if an employee discloses information based on a recommendation from the city attorney.
Protect Closed Session Discussions
The ordinance, sponsored by councilmen Mike Karbassi and Garry Bredefeld in conjunction with Mayor Lee Brand, is intended to protect attorney-client information discussed in the closed sessions of council meetings.
The closed session part of a public meeting is legally allowed to be held out of public sight. However, the Brown Act limits what items can be discussed — mainly labor negotiations, personnel matters, property negotiations, and litigation involving the city. Any formal action in closed session must be reported openly.
Both Karbassi and Bredefeld said punishing recipients of leaked information, including media, was not their intent.
Ordinance Changed
Glen A. Smith, litigation director for the First Amendment Coalition, told GV Wire that punishing recipients of leaked confidential information is “blatantly unconstitutional.” Experts expressed concern about how such punishment might affect media organizations from engaging in First Amendment-protected activities.
[rlic_related_post_one]
While the ordinance builds in whistleblower protections, it still lists the unauthorized dissemination of confidential information as a misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in jail and/or a $1,000 fine.
The council is scheduled to debate the ordinance at its Thursday meeting.
[rlic_related_post_two]
David Taub has spent most of his career in journalism behind the scenes working as a TV assignment editor and radio producer. For more than a decade, he has worked in the Fresno market with such stops at KSEE-24, KMJ and Power Talk 96.7. Taub also worked the production and support side of some of TV sports biggest events including the Super Bowl, the NBA Finals and NASCAR to name a few. Taub graduated from the University of Michigan with dual degrees in communications and political science. You can contact David at 559-492-4037 or at Send an Email
This proposal is silly. There are already state statutes forbidding the leaking of confidential or privileged information from closed door sessions. The law sets forth potential remedies for violations. The state also provides solid whistle blower protections, a bit more expansive than what Mr. Karbassi sets forth in his proposal.
The council member is attempting to make a splash with something that is already covered by state occupation. Anything in excess of state law will be shot down and merely cause litigation costs. What is he attempting to gain?
Brenda A Linder
November 5, 2019 at 11:51 am
This proposal is silly. There are already state statutes forbidding the leaking of confidential or privileged information from closed door sessions. The law sets forth potential remedies for violations. The state also provides solid whistle blower protections, a bit more expansive than what Mr. Karbassi sets forth in his proposal.
The council member is attempting to make a splash with something that is already covered by state occupation. Anything in excess of state law will be shot down and merely cause litigation costs. What is he attempting to gain?
Teri
November 7, 2019 at 9:03 am
How many times have you heard people laugh & groan when you say you’re from Fresno?