IID Closed Session Controversy: Various authors and opinions.

IVPress: IID staff booted from closed session

EL CENTRO — In the past, when the Imperial Irrigation Board of Directors went into a closed session, certain district staff members were generally allowed to participate and listen in on the discussions.

That ended Tuesday, when new Director JB Hamby made five motions in closed session to exclude certain staff and others he considered not pertinent to the item being discussed.

For example, if the item was on water matters, he felt there was no need for the energy department to be included.

One of those motions excluded, among others, a newly hired IID consultant. All five motions passed by a vote of 3-2.

IID Counsel Frank Oswalt announced the motions and votes in the public meeting following the closed session.

Hamby would mention by name the people who should be allowed while “excluding all others” for the particular agenda item.

Hamby said his reasoning was simple enough. If, for instance, there was an item for litigation, only those involved in the process should be allowed to listen to the discussion.

Complying with the Brown Act, he said, was the primary concern.

“There have been concerns shared with me by one member of the board,” he said and decided to make the motion after Oswalt briefed the board on the open meeting act requirements.

“You risk losing your attorney-client privilege, and it opens up a lot of risks,” he said. “We abide by the Brown Act. A meeting is fully closed or fully open.”

Wally Leimgruber, the newly hired environmental and land use consultant for the district, was the only person allowed to be present for the morning session before the IID board went into closed session due to COVID-19 safety concerns.

Leimgruber, who has a six-month contract with IID, said he attended the closed session of the Dec. 1 meeting without any concerns, but that was not possible on Tuesday.

“Per the direction of the IID board they took action that all IID staff (leave).” Leimgruber said, adding that he came back for the open session that started at 1:20 p.m.

“Because I am working with IID I was asked to be at the meeting,” he said, reiterating he and other district staff were asked to leave when the closed session began.

Leimgruber said at this time he is not sure if he will be allowed to attend closed sessions in the future.

Hamby said he has been told IID in the past has violated the Brown Act by allowing non-essential people to listen into discussions of closed meetings.

However, he conceded there is no proof that this has been happening.

Director Norma Sierra Galindo disagreed with Hamby, especially when the public relations staff and the consultant were excluded from attending the closed meeting.

She said if there was an issue with something like air pollution or the budget there would be a need for a public relations person to convey the issues to the public.

Groups or people on conference calls were also told they would not be allowed to participate.

“He made motion after motion,” Galindo said. Hamby said all of his motions were approved by the majority of the board.

Staff Writer Michael Maresh can be reached at mmaresh@ivpressonline.com.

The Mex Factor: Assault to Power

Arturo Bojorquez

The results of November’s elections left us with a wave of new officials within the different levels of government. The state's decision to send the ballots directly to voters appears to have boosted turnout, as did strong emotions surrounding the presidential election. It’s hard to say how strongly these factors affected the outcomes of local races, but it seems reasonable to speculate many voters checked the box for candidates who might not have fared as well in a typical election year.

The elections not only left us a good number of women elected to various positions (a good thing, as I’ve noted here in the past), but also led to many newcomers to win. In some of these cases, the message from the voters was clear — no to the incumbent official.

However, I highly doubt the voter’s decision represents a blank check for the winners. I truly believe citizens wanted change, but not one backward instead of progressive and forward.

Last week, a number of newly elected officials took the oath of office for their respective positions, which allows them to meet officially and begin crafting new policies and guidelines to meet the needs and demands of their constituencies. The unfortunate thing has been that, in some cases, their first actions have been about settling scores.

For example, in the Imperial Irrigation District Board Division 1 Director Alex Cárdenas was usurped in his aspirations to become the chair of the board within the most important public agency of Imperial Valley. Although nothing is clearly written (which must now should be addressed and resolved through bills or internal regulations), the presidency traditionally has passed to whomever held the vice presidency the previous year. So it has been and so it should be. The trouble is that the voters decided to place two people on the board of directors who lack the political capacity to manage the affairs of the people. They have been joined by director Jim Hanks, who appears to have been intoxicated with the lust for power. That was very unfortunate.

A little further south, the newly elected council members of Calexico, Raúl Ureña and Gloria Romo, have requested changes in the date of the when new officers are elected from July to December for the sole purpose of removing controversial Mayor Rosie Arreola-Fernández.

The Calexico mayor, who was involved in a pair of widely reported car accidents in 2019, one of which resulted in a DUI sentence, was appointed by her colleagues months ago despite protests of a sector of the community and criticisms posted on social networks.

However, no matter how much the person is disliked by some citizens, there should be respect for the office that person represents, not to mention the voters him or her there. In the case of the Imperial Irrigation District, three directors sent a message the interests voters in Division 1 were somehow lesser than their own. What’s more it signals the public that they can expect theater to take precedence over a more serious-minded approach to governance going forward.

Deposing an official for purely political reasons or violating unwritten laws to occupy positions of power for purposes of revenge or power is the behavior of tyrants or dictators of a banana republic and not of a true democracy.

Adelante Valle Editor Arturo Bojorquez can be reached at abojorquez@ivpressonline.com or 760-335-4646.

VOICE OF THE PEOPLE Harm from Hamby

James Shinn

IID Director JB Hamby came by my house during the campaign. When we visited, I noticed that he had a nice pitch, but never asked me what my concerns about power or water were. That bothered me. In the front-page article on the IID (Dec. 17) in this paper, it seems like he wants to limit IID board meeting participation. That concerns me for various reasons.

I study Proverbs every morning. Today is Dec. 17, so I study chapter 17. Solomon being the wise guy he was, was smart enough to tell us to seek wisdom (Proverbs, Chapters 11, 12, 15, 19, 24 …).

We are to seek it from wise people and from many sources. So far, it seems Mr. Hamby wants to decrease transparency and input. There are hundreds of power and water employees with thousands of years of experience. Hamby’s experience working in the power or water business is weeks. By limiting power people from water meetings, and vice versa, he is slowing the flow of wisdom like a canal gate.

Government representatives and other elected officials may have the bucks to get elected, but that does not guarantee brains. Do not mistake intelligence for wisdom, technical expertise or the ability to solve problems. I am a really smart guy, but I don’t try to repair my Hyundai car. I seek wise guidance and pay for it. Mr. Hamby needs to pay his dues, listen to others and reconsider his need to control process and procedures.

Although a retired counselor and senior citizen, I have 30+ years’ experience in management, training others and setting up successful programs here in the Valley in the areas of health, education and social work. I have also been a successful small business owner. Fortunately, I have worked mostly for and with great leaders. Good leaders go on a learning curve if they are willing learn. Others just seem to just disappear.
--James Shinn

Go, and Shinn No More.

At the first meeting of the new Imperial Irrigation District Board of Directors, the Board took swift action to resolve a number of long-term issues at IID.

The Board took five actions in closed session to narrow down attendance in closed session to only essential personnel in order to fully comply with the Brown Act, preserve the District’s attorney-client privilege, and comply with the Board’s own formerly neglected policy.

The Board’s action has been widely hailed as correcting chronic improprieties at the IID Board. However, self-proclaimed “really smart guy” James Shinn doesn't fully grasp the limited purpose of closed session meetings and why they are, in fact, closed.

In his opinion entitled “Harm from Hamby” on December 19th, he grouses that the Board’s actions to limit closed session attendance constitute limiting participation and decreased transparency. In that respect, he is correct — that is exactly what the law requires.

As the League of Cities guide to the Brown Act notes, “The express purpose of the Brown Act is to assure that local government agencies conduct the public’s business openly and publicly… Generally, public officials should think of themselves as living in glass houses, and that they may only draw the curtains when it is in the public interest to preserve confidentiality.” But that does not mean that a board can simply invite anyone in, for any purpose when the curtains are drawn.

Closed sessions, by their nature, must be fully closed as the reason for holding these meetings outside the view of the public is only for items so confidential and so secret that they cannot be conducted publicly. Litigation and public employee evaluations are such allowable exceptions.

The Board’s action to exclude non-essential personnel from closed session was meant to follow Board policy for the Board to evaluate a direct report and also to prevent the destruction of attorney-client privilege by the attendance of non-essential individuals which creates very real legal risks for the District.

Shinn states that these actions “[slow] the flow of wisdom like a canal gate.” But the more appropriate metaphor for preserving confidentiality in a closed session meeting is to stop leaks on a dripping faucet.

I don’t doubt that Mr. Shinn is a “really smart guy,” but in truth, he is really misguided. In his own counseling practice, did Mr. Shinn reject wisdom for excluding dozens of staff and guests from sessions where he discussed deeply private matters with his clients? Certainly not. Not only was it the right thing to do, he was legally required to maintain confidentiality.

In public meetings, the place for transparency and inclusion is in open session. Closed sessions are strictly limited to items that require absolute secrecy and must necessarily be limited in attendance. As a recently elected officer on the Board, it is my responsibility to ensure that the public’s business is conducted publicly.

Like Mr. Shinn, I too am a reader of Proverbs. One of my favorites is from Chapter 15: “The tongue of the wise uses knowledge rightly, But the mouth of fools pours forth foolishness.”

JB Hamby IID Director, Division 2