Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Board Procedure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Respiratory Care Board unanimously adopts finding of necessity to hold closed session on pending litigation
Summary
The Respiratory Care Board of California voted unanimously at a special meeting to adopt findings that holding this closed-session meeting on fewer than 10 days' notice was necessary to protect the public interest and to confer with counsel on pending litigation (Sacramento County Superior Court case no. 23CharlieVictor004237).
President Garcia presided over a special meeting of the Respiratory Care Board of California at which the board unanimously adopted a finding of necessity to convene a closed session to discuss pending litigation. The board said delays required to provide the standard 10 days' advance notice would cause substantial hardship and would compromise its ability to meet litigation deadlines and confer with legal counsel.
Executive Officer Bridal, explaining the legal basis for the action, said the finding is being made under the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act and Government Code provisions that permit meetings on shorter notice where delay would harm the public interest and where the board must confer with counsel. EO Bridal summarized required factual findings covering timing, coordination of multiple meeting locations, potential prejudice to the board's defense if it waited for the next scheduled meeting, and the need to provide directions to counsel.
Dr. Wong moved to adopt the factual findings "as listed by EO Bridal," and Member Klepa seconded the motion. The chair opened the motion to public comment at the physical locations and on Webex; no members of the public requested to speak. The board then conducted a roll-call vote; all members present voted in the affirmative and the motion passed, allowing the board to proceed to closed session.
The motion text on the record asked the board to find that providing 10 days' advance notice "would pose a substantial hardship" and that immediate action was required to protect the public interest so the board could timely confer with legal counsel and address litigation deadlines. The board adjourned the public portion of its meeting and moved to closed session to confer with legal counsel regarding Sacramento County Superior Court case number 23CharlieVictor004237.
The vote to adopt the finding was recorded on the public record; the motion was made by Dr. Wong and seconded by Member Klepa. The board then proceeded to the closed session specified in Government Code section 11126(e)(1).
