Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legal Claims Transparency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press council for transparency over redacted claimant letter and alleged filing irregularities
Summary
Multiple public commenters criticized how a claim by Josie Flores Clark was submitted and posted to the agenda, cited redacted pages in an Aug. 26 letter, and urged the council to follow public‑records and claims procedures; the council moved the matter to closed session under agenda item 5.3.
Several National City residents and commenters raised questions about a claimant letter dated Aug. 26 that was attached to the special-meeting agenda and about whether the submission complied with city claims procedures.
At the microphone, one commenter said the letter contained eight redacted pages and that his name and his child’s name appeared in the document. "I wanna make sure I get this right. Twice my child is mentioned and 6 times my name is mentioned in that letter," he said, asking what had been withheld in the redacted pages.
Other speakers alleged procedural irregularities in how the claim was submitted and in how it appeared on the council agenda. Maria Severson said the letter was addressed to Mayor Ron Morrison and not to the city clerk, and she noted that the claim form posted on the city's website requires filing with the city clerk and an original signature. "The letter was submitted to mayor Morrison. It does not say city clerk... The mayor's assistant is getting special treatment," Severson said, adding she had made a public-records request to learn how the document reached the agenda.
Attorney and commenter Michael Aguirre warned that sponsoring or aiding a "false claim" could expose officials to legal liability and cited government code in his remarks. "By sponsoring Josie Flores Clark's August 26 false claim ... you may be found to have colluded," Aguirre said, and he urged council members to comply with California law and public‑records duties.
Several speakers invoked the Ralph M. Brown Act’s language about public access and transparency, arguing that with redactions and the speed of the special meeting it was difficult for the public to evaluate the claim. One commenter asked whether the council and staff had followed the city's claim-filing procedures and whether required signatures and receipt information were present on the posted documents.
The council's city attorney announced the meeting would move into closed session to discuss anticipated litigation, including an item specifically identified as claimant Josie Flores Clark (agenda item 5.3). The city entered closed session; no public action or disposition of the claim was announced when the council reconvened.
Public commenters repeatedly asked the council to release unredacted material where legally permissible and to confirm whether internal procedures for accepting claims had been followed. The concerns centered on procedural transparency rather than allegations resolved on the record; commenters urged the city to produce records and to follow California open‑meeting and public‑records law.
No formal council action was reported in open session on agenda item 5.3; the council announced it would discuss the claim in closed session and reconvened without reporting a public disposition.
