“Don’t use social media.” That was the advice given to Portola city council members by the city’s attorney, Steven Gross, during the Portola City Council’s Jan. 14 meeting.
The advice was part of a briefing Gross provided the council on recent changes to the Ralph M. Brown Act, a California law that governs the operations of local legislative bodies. The purpose of the Brown Act is to guarantee the public’s right to attend and participate in meetings of such bodies.
The Plumas County Board of Supervisors received similar updates from Joshua Brechtel, county counsel.
Senate Bill 707, signed into law Oct. 3, 2025, makes sweeping changes to the Brown Act. Gross called the changes “monumental” — a far cry from the minor updates that might be expected in a typical legislative cycle. Some of the changes went into effect Jan. 1, while others take effect July 1.
Gross submitted a five-page memo as part of the council’s agenda packet detailing the changes — both those that would and would not affect the council. Attending remotely, he explained the memo to the council during the meeting.
Changes that affect the council
The new law makes the existing rules regarding social media usage permanent. Currently, a meeting occurs when a quorum of council members talk or communicate either directly or through intermediaries about some item of business that may come before the city, Gross said. For the Portola City Council, a quorum is three council members.
The rule is different regarding social media, which includes platforms such as Facebook, Instagram and X. All that is required to constitute a meeting on social media is for one council member to directly respond to a post by another council member.
Gross provided a hypothetical example: “Council member <Bill> Powers makes a post on Facebook that says, ‘Hey, we’ve made great progress in 2025 with respect to the Gulling Street Bridge.’ Now if another council member responds to that post with just a thumbs up — ‘I like that post’ — you’ve now violated the Brown Act.”
Considering the way the law is written, without knowing whether another council member will respond or what exactly constitutes a “direct response,” Gross advised that council members abstain from using social media at all. If they do use social media, Gross suggested reading only and not posting, and certainly not posting about city business. “The safest course of action is to save your comments about city business for council meetings,” he said.
Council member Jim Murphy asked how council members can interact with the mayor or request that an item be placed on a meeting agenda. Council members can still communicate one-on-one via phone or email, Gross said, but he reminded the council that members’ emails and text messages are public records that can be disclosed and discovered.
Powers, currently mayor, requested that Gross return to the council at a later date with additional social media usage scenarios. “A couple of these could be very confusing,” he said. “I want to be real clear about how we address those specifics.”
A previous provision of the Brown Act that allowed remote attendance by members under the Americans with Disabilities Act has now been incorporated into the law. Members who need to attend remotely to accommodate a disability can now do so, and their attendance will be counted for all purposes, including achieving a quorum, said Gross.
SB 707 does not change existing teleconference rules, meaning that certain requirements must be met if a council member attends remotely. However, the new law does merge prior “just cause” and “emergency circumstances” rules for remote attendance. This covers situations such as contagious illness, family medical emergencies, childcare obligations, military service obligations and others.
Gross explained that in order for a council member to appear remotely at the last minute, the city would need to “institutionalize” its use of Zoom to guarantee virtual public participation in all situations. If the council takes this step, it would be prohibited from taking action during meetings if its telephonic or internet connection broadcast is disrupted, said Gross. He offered to provide additional guidance for the council if members decide to pursue this option.
Currently the Portola City Council allows public remote attendance as a courtesy only. Every agenda states that remote attendance by the public is not guaranteed in the event of disruptions or connectivity issues.
In a change for agenda items previously considered by committee, an opportunity for public comment must now be provided under certain circumstances. Gross said this hasn’t previously been an issue for the council because its meetings are not so well attended that allowing the public to provide comment on any item would pose a challenge.
Whereas previously it was optional to provide a copy of the Brown Act to every person serving on a legislative body, it is now required. Gross said that City Manager Ryan Bonk had already met this requirement by providing the document to the council members.
The new law clarifies the longstanding right of the public to record meetings, provided that the recording process does not disrupt the meeting.
Changes for county supervisors
Brechtel’s update for county supervisors was brief. Much of the new law’s requirements — “the burdensome things” — apply only to public entities representing populations over 30,000, he said. One change that will affect Plumas County is an increase in the requirements for oral reports, which now apply to department heads as well as supervisors, Brechtel said..
He clarified the requirements for responding to outages in Zoom and other devices used to connect the public to board meetings. County or city officials have 60 minutes to repair the online system. If they are unable to do so, they can legally resume the meeting, Brechtel said. He also noted changes in the supervisors’ ability to remove a disruptive member of the public appearing both in person and online.
Brechtel said he was “uncomfortable” offering more specific information until he had a chance to review SB 707 more carefully. That drew a response from Deb Hopkins, a Quincy resident who frequently attends the supervisors meetings.
The Brown Act is designed to enhance public access to governmental bodies and their actions, she said. “I’m disappointed you didn’t bring a detailed list of how this affects us, I hope you are prepared to present that,” Hopkins said.
Planning Director Tracey Ferguson also asked Brechtel for more information about how the Brown Act changes will affect the planning commission and other agencies under her department. Most do not currently offer online accessibility, she said.
Brechtel committed to returning with additional information “when I am comfortable.” The changes enacted by SB 707 will likely be litigated, he added.
Changes that don’t affect the council
Gross, the City of Portola attorney, included a brief overview of changes that do not affect the city council. In addition to the population limits and connectivity issues described by Brechtel, larger entities must now allow for translation assistance, which includes providing space and time for translators and translation equipment during meetings. The changes also require translating agendas and website content into languages spoken by more than 20% of the agency’s population.
Larger entities are also required to take additional specific actions to encourage public participation in their meetings. They must now make a “reasonable effort” to reach out to groups within their communities whose members don’t typically attend meetings, or who don’t speak English.
As with the Brown Act in general, the goal of these changes is to improve or increase civic engagement and participation in meetings. Gross clarified that just because the city isn’t required to meet these provisions doesn’t mean that the council can’t choose to adopt them or take similar actions that members deem appropriate.
“We shouldn’t just look at the law and say, ‘Oh, well, we’re not required to do it. So we just absolutely won’t do it.’ If there are actions that we think that might be worthwhile, that could increase public participation, <promote> a better understanding of what the city does and how it does it, we can certainly take those kinds of actions,” he said.
Source: Plumas Sun
