Shasta County Plans to Restrict Media Access at Public Meetings
Supervisors Mary Rickert and Tim Garman both spoke out strongly against the county’s new policy. Supervisor Kevin Crye said he supports the new policy because he supports the County’s top administrative, legal and law enforcement leaders and wants to keep the media safe.
7.27.24 11:03 am: We have updated the story to add information about the County’s access to video during meetings and disruptions.
On Friday, July 26, the county issued a statement saying members of the press should remain in a separate room during public meetings moving forward.
“Effective immediately” the press release says, “any member of the media who wants to observe, record, or otherwise document a Board of Supervisors meeting, is requested to set up equipment, and attend from inside the Media Room, located just off the foyer to Board Chambers.”
From the “Media Room”, which has not been accessible to media in recent years, the press’s access to the people’s business is visible only through glass windows, at a distance far enough to prevent a clear visual of supervisors’ facial expressions and body language. Conversation inside the chambers is provided via an audio feed of only what’s spoken on microphone, relayed through speakers.
Should members of the press choose not to utilize the Media Room and enter the chambers where the people’s business is being conducted, the county indicates, they may lose their access to document the actions of county staff and law enforcement, even from a distance, during a disruption.
“Any member of the media opting not to attend through access to the Media Room,” the press release continues, “will be considered participants in the Board of Supervisors meeting and may be asked to vacate the Chambers, in the event of a disruption.”
The county said its new rules limiting media access are a response to last week’s meeting disruption, which ended in Shasta County Sheriff’s officers forcibly removing a community member from the chamber and ticketing her outside.
It’s not clear why that disruption necessitated changes to media’s access.
California’s transparency law, known as the Brown Act, requires that the press be given consistent access to the people’s business. The press is allowed to continue to attend public meetings even when a meeting disruption necessitates clearing the room, to ensure that the public continues to have access to the workings of government via the media, even on the rare occasions when the public is restricted.
During last week’s incident, members of the press representing Shasta Scout, the Record Searchlight, Action News Now and A News Cafe all remained in the room for the approximately two hours during which community member Jenny O’Connell Nowain quietly refused to leave the room.
The Board chair’s instructions at the beginning of last week’s disruption were that the press could remain in the room while other community members were to leave. Reporters observed the work of county staff and law enforcement over the next two hours, documenting conversations between officials and O’Connell Nowain and providing the public with an up-close view of sheriff’s officers as they forcibly removed her.
The county provides live video access of meetings, including audio that’s spoken into microphones, but the video and audio feed is cut when the room is cleared, leaving the public dependent on press inside the room to document. During last week’s events the county’s own Instagram account was briefly used to view events inside the county’s meeting room, via Shasta Scout’s live feed.
At one point Shasta Scout’s reporter questioned a law enforcement officer who was seeking to encourage O’Connell Nowain to leave voluntarily, asking what law she had broken.
“Who are you?” Shasta County Sheriff Lieutenant Bryan Sancibrian responded without answering the question. He left the room shortly afterwards. O’Connell Nowain was eventually cited by another officer under California Penal Code PC 403, Disturbing a Public Meeting.
Speaking to Shasta Scout by phone on Friday, July 26, Board Chair Kevin Crye said the new policy isn’t a result of the media’s behavior. He also said the new policy wasn’t his idea. According to Crye, the decision was made by County Counsel Joseph Larmour, Sheriff Michael Johnson and CEO David Rickert.
Asked if he supported the new policies restricting media access, Crye said that he “supports putting the public and media’s safety first” and “supports the decisions of his CEO, county counsel and sheriff.”
“This is not forever, right?” Crye asked the Shasta Scout reporter. “I think this is just for the very short term.”
Crye said conversations about how to address disruptions in the board chamber included a discussion about the difficulty of determining who is “real media.” Benjamin Nowain, the husband of the woman who was cited for disruption, briefly refused to leave the room last week, saying he’s also a member of the media. Nowain has provided a series of video shorts known as the Northstate Breakdown, but appeared to be attending the meeting as a member of the public and potential appointee to the Election Commission. Nowain left the meeting voluntarily a few minutes after stating he was press.
According to the nonprofit Freedom Forum, the First Amendment does not allow government entities to place restrictions on who can identify as press. Last November, Laura Hobbs, a self-described stay-at-home mom with a degree in microbiology, used a press pass obtained from the Constitution First Amendment Press Association‘s site to gain access to take pictures and videos at the Shasta County Elections Office. She later unsuccessfully sued the Elections Office for alleged misconduct.
Supervisors Mary Rickert and Tim Garman both spoke out strongly and without hesitation against the county’s decision to restrict media access.
Garman described the policy as “another form of control.”
“The media has a right to be where the news is happening,” Garman said. “I hope the citizens are paying attention.”
Supervisor Rickert also spoke out against the new policy, calling it “another attempt to stifle free speech in our county.”
“I question the rights and freedoms of the press with this new restriction,” Rickert said.
Shasta Scout has reached out to the First Amendment Coalition for information on the legality of the county’s new policy.
Do you have a correction to this story? Email us at editor@shastascout.org.
Author
Comments (28)
Comments are closed.
Related Articles
Memorial service scheduled for Congressman Doug LaMalfa
The service for the late congressman will be held on Saturday, Jan. 24 in Chico.
MLK Day is this upcoming Monday. Here’s what’s going on in Shasta County
The Shasta Beloved Community and community partners are holding a celebration for the holiday at Sequoia Middle School.
At tense Redding Planning Commission meeting, neighbors near proposed county correctional facility push back
Plans for a correctional facility that the county hopes to build on city-owned land have sparked outrage among nearby residents. At a Redding Planning Commission meeting yesterday members of the public, planning commissioners, city staff, and Sheriff Mike Johnson all expressed their frustrations — from different sides of the debate.
Sounds like they want to limit what the media see and hear and therefor report. Seems to me it contradicts both the Brown Act and the First Amendment.
I agree with Babs and Jon. Where is the rights of the press limited?
By the way, I’m not ultra right MAGA, I’m Conservative MAGA. You people on the other hand are FAR LEFT PROGRESSIVES including the editor of this rag who won’t bow her head for prayer or recite the pledge of our country.
Hi Nick: This comment made me laugh. Reminds me of the Sunday School days when we’d tattle on each other and then our parents would ask how we knew someone else’s eyes were open if ours were closed. 🙂 More seriously, as someone who has lived in other countries, I’m thankful to be a citizen of a country where we have the freedom to pray and pledge, or not.
You could at least show some respect for the country you’re in.
Nick: I respect my country every day by taking the rule of law seriously. Respect comes in many forms: salutes, pledges and prayers are easy to perform.
There is a reason one of the most basic tenets of this country is Freedom of Religion and Separation of Church and State.
You are more than welcome to worship as you want so long as it doesn’t violate anybody else’s rights, but you have no right, and neither does anybody else, INCLUDING THE GOVERNMENT to force me to do the same.
That is why Project 2025 scares the hell out of me. It actually outlines “infusing Christian nationalism into every facet of government policy”. In a way, I find it ironic that they claim to do this to “Strengthen the family and save the children”, when every day there seems to be a new story about some psueudo-Christian right-wing, MAGA Hat wearing, religious authority being arrested for crimes against children.
Rules for thee but not for me, eh?
As far as respecting our country, I do so by respecting our Constitution, a document that your Conservative Project 2025 wants to systematically dismantle.
That is NOT an America I would want to live in.
“Hello, is this the ACLU office ? Just wanted to chat about something going on in Shasta County…Oh, you’ve already heard about it, and you’re sending a 1st Amendment Attorney our way ? Well, thanks and see you soon”.
BTW…now’s the time for the media to simply stand your ground and ignore this Fascistic inspired edict. They won’t arrest all of you, the County Counsel does not need a lawsuit on his hands over the 1st Amendment.
I smell a lawsuit. Where do I sign up?
This is a HUGE PROBLEM. Thanks Annelise for keeping us informed.
Sounds like Shasta County will be making national news again?!
The actual problem lies within the first amendment. Unfortunately, it gives the news media authority to actually lie, and not be held responsible for their lies! I got this directly From a seasoned reporter for the Huffington Post. And we all know they lie.!! Reporting the news to push an agenda is precisely what reporters are not supposed to do sadly on the left. That’s all they do. I welcome these restrictions.
So long as the reporters have access to the meeting and can hear what is being said I don’t see the problem. Especially since we have a group of people who regularly attend these meetings with the intent of causing chaos and trying to undermine the credibility of certain members of the Board. I have watched some of these meetings and the behavior of these people is shocking and oftentimes offensive. They shout and boo and even use profanity. Their behavior creates an unsafe and unhealthy environment for everyone.
And if one of the right wing supervisors decides to cut the audio? What then?
Babs, do you support freedom of speech?
Because it really doesn’t sound like you do.
Annelise,
Why, as a reporter, would you try to get involved with the interaction shown in this video? As a reporter, you should remain unengaged, but in this instance, you appear to be somewhat antagonistic towards the officer.
Media should do their job, which is to impartially show or report the facts.
Marsha: Thanks for your question. The job of a journalist is to seek truth and report it. Like the rest of the public I had many questions during this disruption. Was a law being broken? What law? Could law enforcement take action? How? Unlike most of the public, as a journalist, I had access to ask those questions. And, in fact, it was my job to ask, because without access to the facts, it’s difficult to report them. Shasta Scout journalists follow the Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics. Reading through it may be helpful as it’s a reminder of how very complex this role is. Thanks for sharing your concern.
The terrible 3 on the BOS are running scared because they know just about everything they do is illegal.. shoving the press into a separate room is an exhibition of control..
To Jon Stadille and Babs – what have any of the local media outlets published that is untrue or otherwise against the Board of Supervisors rules of decorum to merit these restrictions? The factual nature of any of their reporting on Board of Supervisor actions can be verified by watching the official meeting videos. Also, to claim that “Reporting the news to push an agenda is precisely what reporters are not supposed to do sadly on the left. That’s all they do” is extraordinarily disingenuous in light of the $787 million FOX News settlement with Dominion.
Jon: I think what you’re saying is that you don’t value the Constitutional right to freedom of the press unless that press says things you agree with. That’s kind of the whole thing with freedoms though. They protect not only our rights but others.
Remember Mr. Stadile, the other side of the political spectrum have alleged reporters/media in the BoS chamber as well. e.g Lori Bridgeford and a gentelman who claims to be with Red,White, Blue…do you want them restricted too ? You need to read the 1st Amendment.
Well if course you support these restrictions, Jon. It’s because you only care about your perceived rights and no one else’s.
This nonsense will medially be tested in court and shot down.
Mr. Stabile,
Do you consider FOX to be on the left?
Once again, the new hires of this Board are proving their incompetence.
Blocking reporters to county business is a fascist tactic – whether or not the county understands this or not. When you restrict information from the public, corruption is given healthy soil to bloom into tyranny.
Remember, Trump and MAGA politicians, both Local and National, all too often clearly state, “The Media Is The Enemy of The People.” The new media policy from the Jones, Crye Kelstorm Cartel is right out of the Project 2025 Playbook. See: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/project-2025-what-a-second-trump-term-could-mean-for-media-and-technology-policies/
Reject MAGA.
Reject Project 2025
There’s no need to block reporters in order to restrict information, it’s happening all the time. Stories are slanted and significant facts are omitted to fit an agenda; it’s obvious as some news agencies attempt to justify anti-Semitism and support protesters who think it’s okay to burn the U.S. flag. The press and others have been hiding Joe Biden’s mental decline for years and they tell us the border is secure; Kamala, the border Czar, did a good job, right? Tyrannical liberals forced Joe out of his candidacy for President and dubbed Kamala the next nominee. The truth will ultimately prevail, in the meantime it’s obscured often or completely blocked by “mainstream media”. And when fake news supports an agenda, reporters are supporting tyranny.
Thanks Annelise-keep us informed about legal implications for press access. Also do you think you can get a statement from the two supervisors – Long and Plummer who will be in place in January 2025?