Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Closed Session topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Vallejo City Council to recess into closed session over multiple lawsuits and personnel evaluations
Summary
At about 5:05 p.m. the Vallejo City Council announced it would meet in closed session to discuss two pending lawsuits, initiation of one new case, two additional anticipated litigation matters, and performance evaluations for the city manager and city attorney. No public speakers signed up before the council recessed.
The Vallejo City Council convened and announced it would recess into closed session at about 5:05 p.m. The city attorney told the council it would consider multiple litigation matters and two public-employee performance evaluations.
“The city council will meet in closed session this evening with regard to the following items,” the city attorney said as the closed-session agenda was read aloud. The attorney identified: (A) an existing litigation matter, Nicholas v. City of Vallejo (Solano County Superior Court), cited under Government Code section 54956.9(d)(1); (B) an existing litigation matter, Informed California Foundation Incorporated v. City of Vallejo (Solano County Superior Court), cited under Government Code section 54956.9(d)(1); (C) anticipated initiation of litigation under Government Code section 54956.9(d)(4) (one case); and (D) anticipated litigation with significant exposure under Government Code section 54956.9(d)(2) (two cases). The attorney also announced two personnel items: performance evaluations under Government Code section 54957 for the city manager (Item E) and the city attorney (Item F).
City staff reported there were no members of the public signed up to speak on the closed-session items before the council recessed. The council then adjourned into closed session. The public record in the open meeting contains only the announced items; any deliberations and outcomes arising during the closed session are not reflected in the public transcript.
No motions or votes on these items were recorded in the public portion of the meeting. The transcript does not include a meeting date, the presiding officer’s full name beyond “Mayor Sors” appearing during roll call, or the city attorney’s name; those details were not specified in the published record provided here. If and when the council returns to open session with reportable actions, those outcomes would normally appear in subsequent minutes or a public report.
