City attorneys advise recusal rules and clarify quorum, voting and remote participation for homeless boards

At a Nomination Committee meeting, legal staff clarified how conflict-of-interest rules and bylaws apply to homeless-advisory bodies and outlined options for public remote participation.

Deputy city attorney advised that individuals who are employees or officers of nonprofit organizations that receive Continuum of Care (CoC) funds can be appointed to the Local Homeless Coordinating Board but must "conflict out" (recuse) from any discussion or vote in which their organization has a financial interest. The attorney said staff are working with the LHCB secretary to amend bylaws to allow a lower voting threshold where a lower quorum is necessary because conflicted members have had to recuse themselves.

The attorney also said the committee cannot lower the statutory quorum for the LHCB (it remains at six members), but the voting threshold can be defined so that when six members are present a majority (four of six) could pass a matter, ensuring the board can still transact business when some members are recused.

Committee members also discussed remote participation. Legal counsel said the bylaws are not explicit about public remote access and that enabling WebEx for public comment is feasible when logistics permit; however commissioners generally must appear in person except for two narrow "just cause" exceptions (for example caregiving or conference attendance), which require special notice and justification.

Legal and administrative references discussed during the item included the Brown Act, Robert's Rules (procedural guidance), the local Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) process for Continuum of Care funds, and an internal reference to "section 3.214 of the campaign governmental code" requiring disclosure of certain professional relationships on the record.

Members asked staff to return with a clearer roster and a list of which current board members' organizations receive CoC funds so the committee and the full commission can evaluate whether proposed appointments would create disqualifying conflicts or undermine quorum.