Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Governance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board discloses closed-session actions: new mental-health director appointment and settlement authority on two cases

Orange County Board of Supervisors · June 25, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

County counsel reported in open session that the board approved the appointment of Ian Clemmer as county mental health officer, authorized a proposed $895,000 settlement in a personal-injury case (subject to final approvals), took no action on one closed-session matter after a recusal, and authorized limited settlement authority and a cross-complaint in another case by a 4—1 vote.

At the top of the meeting the board disclosed outcomes from a lengthy closed session. County counsel reported the board unanimously approved the appointment of Ian Clemmer to serve as the county mental health officer and director of mental health and delegated authority to the county executive to negotiate and execute an at-will employment agreement in accordance with the executive management salary schedule.

Counsel also said the board unanimously approved a proposed $895,000 settlement in Brian Thomas Danvers v. County of Orange, a case arising from a rear-end collision involving a sheriff's patrol vehicle, with the county not contesting liability; counsel noted the settlement remains subject to final approvals and copies will be made available to risk management and others upon finalization.

On a separate closed-session matter the board took no action after Supervisor Sarmiento recused himself because of a family connection to the plaintiff's attorney. In another case, Michelle Carr v. City of Dana Point, the board voted 4—1 to authorize limited settlement authority to outside counsel and directed the county to file a cross-complaint against the city to enforce the city's contractual obligation to indemnify the county; counsel indicated the vote was recorded as 4 in favor and 1 opposed.

County counsel concluded the readout by saying no other reportable actions were taken in closed session that day.