San Luis Obispo council votes to authorize lawsuit against Righetti M.C. LLC

The San Luis Obispo City Council voted 5-0 on April 1 to authorize the initiation of litigation against Righetti M.C. LLC following a closed-session discussion of pending claims. The council’s action directs the city attorney to file suit after negotiations failed to resolve the matter.

City Attorney reported that the council had met in closed session on “exposure to litigation” and “consideration of initiation of litigation” related to claims filed by Righetti M.C. LLC. "Based on those facts on the motion of Council Member Marks, seconded by Mayor Stewart with a 5 0 vote, the council did authorize the initiation of litigation against Righetti NC LLC, and so we will proceed with the filing of that litigation based on the facts and circumstances and the documents on file," the City Attorney reported during the open-session report-out.

The council’s action formalizes the city’s next step after negotiations did not produce an agreement. Council Member Ijan Marks made the motion and Mayor Eric A. Stewart seconded it; the vote was unanimous. No further details about claims or the specific legal grounds were provided during the report-out, other than references to claims on file and correspondence between the parties.

Why it matters: initiating litigation moves a dispute from negotiation into the courts, which can alter timelines, costs and remedies for both the city and the private party involved. The council’s authorization means the city will proceed with filing a complaint unless a settlement is reached before filing. City officials said they had attempted to negotiate but that attempts were unsuccessful.

City Attorney said the decision followed examination of documents and facts on file and that staff had tried to reach a resolution before seeking council approval to file. The city did not give a timetable for filing or disclose more detail about the underlying claims during the public portion of the meeting.

Council members did not discuss or vote on any related budget appropriation during the public report; the action recorded was limited to authorizing the initiation of litigation. Additional procedural steps — including drafting and filing the complaint and any subsequent hearings — will follow normal court and city legal procedures.

A copy of the closed-session report was read into the public record during the meeting’s report-out. The city did not identify whether the litigation will be handled by in-house counsel or an outside law firm; the City Attorney said the city had been negotiating and would proceed based on documents on file.

Prosecution or defense strategies and potential fiscal impacts were not disclosed in open session. The city attorney told the council that the decision was based on the documents and circumstances presented in closed session and that staff would proceed accordingly. The council did not take any additional public action related to the matter at the meeting.

Next steps: the city attorney will proceed to prepare and file the litigation unless a settlement is reached before filing. The city will provide public updates in future meeting reports as permitted by law.