Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Litigation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Manhattan Beach City Council recesses into closed session to consider litigation

Manhattan Beach City Council · August 20, 2025
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

The Manhattan Beach City Council recessed into closed session on Aug. 19 to consider two anticipated litigation matters under Government Code section 54956.9(d)(2) and (e)(1) and an existing case, SC Group 3400 Fletcher LLC v. City of Manhattan Beach, the assistant city attorney said.

The Manhattan Beach City Council on Tuesday, Aug. 19 recessed into closed session to consider two anticipated litigation matters under Government Code section 54956.9(d)(2) and (e)(1) and an existing case, SC Group 3400 Fletcher LLC v. City of Manhattan Beach, Assistant City Attorney David Snow said.

The announcement came after a routine roll call and a 5-0 vote to approve the meeting agenda. Council members recorded present during roll call were Council Member Tarnay, Council Member Cerillion, Council Member Haworth, Mayor Pro Tem Franklin and Mayor Lesser. A motion to approve the agenda was noted in the record as moved by Council Member Charillion and seconded by Council Member Haworth; the council voted 5-0 to adopt the agenda.

“There will be a recess into closed session to consider the items on the agenda, which include two matters of anticipated litigation pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(d)(2) and (e)(1), as well as one existing litigation matter, which is SC Group 3400 Fletcher LLC v. City of Manhattan Beach,” Assistant City Attorney David Snow said in open session. Snow was identified by the presiding official later in the open-session announcements.

No members of the public addressed the council in chambers and there were no requests to speak on Zoom during the public comment period. After the announcement, the council recessed into closed session; no further actions or votes were taken in open session.

Votes at a glance Approve agenda — motion by Council Member Charillion; second by Council Member Haworth. Vote: 5 yes, 0 no.

The council did not disclose details of the litigation items in open session. Closed-session deliberations are confidential under state law, and the council did not state a public timetable for any follow-up disclosures.