Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Litigation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Yuba County supervisors add urgent closed session after county is served in lawsuit
Summary
Supervisors voted to add a closed session to consider litigation filed against the county and City of Marysville; the board later authorized counsel to defend the county and referred outside counsel Porter Scott to represent the county on the matter.
YUBA COUNTY — The Yuba County Board of Supervisors on Feb. 14 used the urgency exception to add a closed-session item after the county was served with a lawsuit, then authorized defense counsel at the meeting’s conclusion.
County counsel asked the board to add agenda item 59/2026 under Government Code §54956.9, saying the county was served on Feb. 9 and must respond within 30 days. The case was identified in the request as Catherine Collins v. City of Marysville and County of Yuba, Yuba County Superior Court CVP-025-01731. Counsel said the two findings required for the urgency exception were satisfied: a need to act before the next regular meeting and that the need arose after the agenda deadline.
Supervisor (mover) made a motion to add the closed-session item and the board approved the motion on a roll-call vote recorded in the minutes, with each supervisor answering “Yes.”
At the end of the meeting, the board reported out from closed session: for Item 50 there was nothing to report; for Item 54 authority was granted to defend the county and to refer representation to the law firm Porter Scott; and for Item 59 authority was granted to defend the county and named defendants and to authorize county counsel to execute any needed waiver of potential conflicts of interest.
Why it matters: adding an urgent closed session enabled county attorneys to confer about litigation strategy and client representation within a time-sensitive response window. The board’s public report-out indicates the county will engage Porter Scott to assist in defending the county in the matters discussed.
What happened next: the board recessed into closed session and, at the meeting’s close, announced the authority to defend and the referral to Porter Scott. No additional public details about the claims in the complaint were provided during the open meeting.
Sources: oral requests and roll-call votes recorded on the Feb. 14 board record and the board’s report-out naming the case and counsel referral.
