Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Executive Session Litigation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sedona City Council authorizes city attorney to pursue litigation over Forest Road and Uptown Park projects
Summary
At its March 3 meeting, the Sedona City Council voted to authorize the city attorney to proceed with litigation as directed in an executive session concerning the Forest Road Connection and the Uptown Park and Garage projects. The motion was seconded and approved; one participant identified as Derek opposed the measure.
The Sedona City Council voted on March 3, 2026, to authorize the city attorney to pursue litigation as directed during an executive session that addressed legal issues tied to the Forest Road Connection project and the Uptown Park and Garage project.
The meeting was called to order at 12:00 p.m., and the clerk conducted roll call: Mayor Ploog and Vice Mayor Fultz were recorded present; Councilor Dunne was excused; Councilors Furman, Hosseini, Kinsella and Pfaff were present. The Chair announced Item 3, describing the council’s intent to hold an executive session for "discussion and consultation with the city attorney for legal advice and to consider the city's position and instruct its attorneys regarding contemplated litigation and settlement discussions conducted in order to avoid litigation regarding the Forest Road Connection project and the Uptown Park and Garage project," and for consultation related to elections, initiatives and zoning matters. The Chair cited the council’s executive-session authority under Arizona law.
After the executive session, the Chair asked for action on the matters discussed. "I'd like to make a motion that we — I move that we authorize the city attorney to proceed with litigation as directed in the executive session," the Chair said. A council member seconded the motion and the council voted to approve it. The transcript does not record a roll-call vote tally; the record indicates that one participant, identified in the meeting as Derek, voted in opposition.
The meeting record does not specify the precise legal claims, the parties to potential litigation, or the exact scope of the attorney’s authorized actions; those details were discussed in executive session and are not on the public record. The Chair’s public motion and the subsequent vote are the recorded public actions: authorization for the city attorney to proceed as previously directed in closed session, and adjournment of the meeting.
The council’s announcement cited executive-session authority under Arizona Revised Statutes; the transcript references executive-session statute language when introducing Item 3. The council adjourned immediately after the post-session vote.
Next steps — including filings, public disclosures, or further council action — were not specified during the public portion of the meeting.
