Selma City Council adds Highland Rose LLP lawsuit to closed session, citing deadline

The Selma City Council voted unanimously on Nov. 18 to add a time-sensitive pending litigation item — Highland Rose LLP v. City of Selma (Fresno County Superior Court case no. 25CECG0503) — to the closed-session agenda. The City Attorney told the council a development occurred after the special agenda was posted that creates a deadline and requires action before the council’s next scheduled meeting.

The council formally moved to add “the city attorney’s description” of the item to closed session and approved the addition by roll-call vote. Council Member Avalos, Council Member Olsaguerra, Council Member Trujillo, Mayor Pro Tem Guerra and Mayor Robertson each recorded affirmative votes. The motion’s mover and seconder were not specified on the record.

The City Attorney described the item as “existing litigation” and said, “there are always deadlines attached to pending litigation, and the development that I’m speaking of, creates a deadline for you to respond to something that’s going on in the litigation,” arguing that waiting until Dec. 2 would be too late. The attorney advised that the item be added under the closed-session litigation provisions of the California Government Code.

The chair then confirmed a separate, nonbinding consensus to rearrange the agenda so closed-session items would follow a special presentation and the council would reconvene to open session after closed session. The meeting recessed to closed session with the attorney’s item added.

What happened next: the council convened to closed session to discuss the litigation item and other closed-session matters; no public details of the litigation discussion were provided on the record at this meeting.