She added that people “without an official role in the meeting should not be present.”
At a council meeting last week, Councilman David Gordon — who on March 5 initially proposed inviting Frutos to a closed meeting — said Albano's opinion differed from what Burbank has done in the past, when elected council members were invited to observe the meetings before being sworn in.
In closed-door meetings, the council may discuss pending litigation, performance evaluations or labor negotiations.
When elected in 2009, Jess Talamantes, along with former council member Bob Kramer, both reportedly participated in closed-session meetings prior to being sworn in, Gordon said.
Former council member Marsha Ramos couldn't remember whether she was invited into closed meetings, but thought it was helpful for Talamantes.
“In terms of transition, it's absolutely useful,” Ramos said. “The reality is once you get there, you're going to ask for all the prior information anyway.”
The council was discussing performance evaluations and setting future goals at the time, and she was on her way out, she said.
“For me to set goals for the future doesn't make any sense,” Ramos said. “It made sense that he was there.”
But Peter Scheer, a Brown Act expert for the First Amendment Coalition, backed Albano's interpretation.
“He doesn't have an official role until he's sworn in,” he said of Frutos.
That means the city's practice has been flawed in the past, Scheer said.
“As a practical matter, it may not make any real difference if he were there in those closed sessions,” Scheer said. “But the better practice under the Brown Act … would be to exclude him until he takes office.”