Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Executive Session Litigation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cochise County supervisors enter executive session over potential litigation involving Vincent
Summary
The Cochise County Board of Supervisors convened a special meeting June 2 and voted to enter an executive session to receive legal advice about possible litigation related to a situation in Vincent; the board returned nearly an hour later and took no public action.
The Cochise County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday, June 2, moved into executive session to receive legal advice about possible litigation stemming from a situation in Vincent, the board’s chair said.
The motion to enter the closed session was made and seconded on the record; the chair called for those in favor and recorded audible 'aye' responses before declaring the board would enter executive session. The chair said the session was authorized under a cited Arizona statute and that the purpose was to consult with the county attorney and civil deputy about potential legal action.
The chair named several attendees who would participate in the closed session, including the county attorney (the transcript later references different names for the county attorney), Jonathan Pinkney (deputy), Sharon Gillman, Joe Casey and Laura Rowanotte; the chair also said Danny Restrepo from the County Attorney’s Office would remain online. The chair announced the board was entering executive session at 03:07.
The board returned from executive session at 03:57. The chair stated on the record that the board would not take any action as a result of that closed-session discussion, and the meeting was then adjourned.
The record identifies the statutory authority cited in the meeting in varying, garbled forms; the transcript contains references rendered as 'ARS 384-3103' and 'ARS 38 4 31.03 subsection a 3.' The common Arizona statute authorizing executive sessions for certain matters is A.R.S. § 38-431.03, which governs executive-session usage by public bodies. The meeting record as provided does not identify a mover or seconder by name and logs two audible 'aye' responses when the chair called the vote to go into executive session.
No further details about the subject of the possible litigation involving Vincent were given on the public record during the meeting, and the chair explicitly said no action would be taken following the closed session.
