Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Council Procedure topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

San Fernando council fails to add walk-on closed-session item, approves agenda

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

At a special meeting that began at 4:30 p.m., the San Fernando City Council failed to secure the two-thirds vote needed to add an urgency "walk-on" item for closed-session discussion on anticipated litigation or personnel, then approved the published agenda and recessed to closed session under Government Code 54956.9.

At a special meeting of the San Fernando City Council that began at 4:30 p.m., council members voted down a proposal to "walk on" an urgent closed-session item and then approved the published agenda.

Councilmember Joe Fajardo moved to add the item, saying he had "only became aware of this yesterday afternoon or evening, and it is a very time sensitive matter," and that details would be discussed in closed session. City Attorney Padilla told the council that the Brown Act requires a two-thirds vote of members present to add a walk-on item and that, with five members present, four yes votes would be required. Padilla said two additional factors must be articulated: that the issue did not come to the city's attention until after the agenda was published and that immediate action is needed.

The council's roll call on the walk-on produced three yes votes and two no votes: Councilmember Patty Lopez, Councilmember Victoria Garcia and Councilmember Joe Fajardo voted yes; Vice Mayor Mary Salodio and Mayor Mary Mendoza voted no. The motion failed because it did not meet the four-vote threshold Padilla described.

Padilla also told the council that three members or the mayor may call a special meeting, but any such meeting must satisfy a 24-hour noticing requirement. Council discussion included whether a short special meeting could be scheduled before a community event the next evening; at least one member said they were not available. After the walk-on motion failed, Fajardo moved to approve the agenda as published; that motion was seconded and passed on a unanimous roll call.

Following approval of the agenda, the council recessed to closed session. Padilla referenced anticipated litigation under Government Code section 54956.9 as the likely basis for that closed session.