Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Litigation Closed Session topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Santa Cruz council adds last-minute litigation item, authorizes appeal and other closed-session directions
Summary
Council voted to add a subsequent-need closed-session item to consider initiating litigation and, in closed session, directed the city attorney on existing cases including authorizing an appeal and joining an existing matter.
The Santa Cruz City Council on Tuesday voted to add a subsequent-need closed-session item to consider initiation of litigation under Government Code section 54956.9(d)(4), and in closed session directed the city attorney's office on existing lawsuits including the city's litigation against Chevron and an appeal of a San Francisco Superior Court ruling.
The council voted unanimously to add the subsequent-need item after City Attorney Tim Condotti (asked about by a different speaker earlier as 'Mister Gaudati') said the matter came to the city's attention after the agenda was posted and required action before the council's next regular meeting on Feb. 25. Council member Golder moved to add the item, and Council member Bruner seconded; the clerk recorded ayes from all members present.
After adjourning into closed session, the council returned to open session where Condotti reported the closed-session outcomes. He said the council received a report from and gave direction to the city attorney's office on an existing case identified as City of Santa Cruz v. Chevron Corporation et al.; approved an appeal of a San Francisco Superior Court order granting a motion to quash by Citco Corporation; and directed the city attorney's office to join in another existing litigation, the parties and particulars of which Condotti said would be available to the public when pleadings are filed.
The city attorney explained the subsequent-need item was added because the need for action developed after the agenda was posted and required action before the Feb. 25 meeting. No additional details about the subjects or potential plaintiffs/defendants were provided at the open-session report other than the names and procedural steps Condotti summarized.
Council did not discuss the merits of the cases in open session. The council's votes to add the closed-session item and the closed-session report were recorded by roll call; no further action was taken in open session on these matters.
The council's action to add the item and the closed-session directions mean the city attorney may proceed as authorized behind closed doors; the public will be able to request pleadings or other filings when they are formally filed in court, Condotti said.
