Allen, alleging Drayman violated the Brown Act in not allowing 10 speakers to address the budget on June 24, continued to demand that the council set aside the vote and reopen public comment on the item.
Even in its official response to his allegations, Allen said the City Attorney’s Office failed to address the right to speak on an action item that is listed on the council’s agenda.
But in the city’s letter, Garcia points to a government code that allows for an exception when the public has been afforded the opportunity — in this case, multiple times — to speak on an item before or during its consideration when no substantial changes have occurred.
Still, Allen said that, with his original demands unmet, he would make good on his promise to file a legal challenge.
With his recourse at City Hall blocked, a challenge will most likely come in the form of a lawsuit seeking an injunction on the budget vote. Although, he would not elaborate on his plans on Wednesday.
“We have already moved on that,” Allen said.
In June, Allen said he was motivated in large part by the alleged inability of the 10 people who had filed speaker cards for the June 24 council budget item to voice their opinions.
But seven of those people frequently address the council on a myriad of issues, and spoke about the budget at least once in the weeks leading up to the June 24 meeting.
The other three people planned to protest the planned closure of the “underutilized” Chevy Chase Branch Library as a way to meet an across-the-board 5% budget cut among city departments.
