Search

Categories

Total Results

No Record Found

View All Results
DONATE

Search Results for: 4956.9 litigation

A&A: When should “anticipated litigation” be agendized?

FAC February 2, 2014

Q: In 2010 our City Council was contacted BY the IRS about a series of Build America Bonds that the City had received. The IRS felt that the money was spent improperly (by spending on acquiring an undeveloped parcel related to an unrelated legal settlement rather than by initiating a ”shovel ready” project). The IRS threatened to take the money back which would likely have bankrupted the City. This was made public two years later

Read More »

A&A: Public notice and disclosure of existing litigation

firstamendment June 13, 2009

Public notice and disclosure of existing litigation Q: Our school district has a closed agenda item with the following sentence. Is this allowed?A) EXISTING LITIGATION(Subdivision (a) of Section 54956.9)Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) the Board will confer with legal counsel concerning existing litigation; disclosure of the case name might jeopardize current settlement negotiations.How can the public comment on a case without knowing the case? A: Under Government Code section 54956.9, an agency must identify

Read More »

A&A: Can settlements be negotiated in closed session if no pending litigation exists?

firstamendment June 13, 2009

Can settlements be negotiated in closed session if no pending litigation exists? Q: Our local water district has held a series (over 6 months) of closed sessions. It appears that the district is negotiating a water rights transfer or deal with another local water district. They cannot negotiate jointly a “settlement” agreement if no “pending” litigation exists. Isn’t this a violation of the Brown Act? If so, what is the recourse? A: The provision of

Read More »

71 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 235 Disclosure of Records Pertaining to Litigation (1988)

firstamendment June 13, 2009

Office of the Attorney General State of California 71 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 235 Opinion No. 87-304 July 13, 1988 THE HONORABLE MAXINE WATERS MEMBER OF THE CALIFORNIA ASSEMBLY THE HONORABLE MAXINE WATERS, MEMBER OF THE CALIFORNIA ASSEMBLY, has requested an opinion of this office on the following questions: 1. What records pertain to “pending litigation” within the meaning of subdivision (b) of section 6254 of the Public Records Act? 2. Do records of a

Read More »

75 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 14 Local Board Can Use Closed Session to Discuss Litigation Settlement (1992)

firstamendment June 13, 2009

Office of the Attorney General State of California 75 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 14 Opinion No. 91-803 February 5, 1992 THE HONORABLE MICHAEL D. BRADBURY DISTRICT ATTORNEY VENTURA COUNTY THE HONORABLE MICHAEL D. BRADBURY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, VENTURA COUNTY, has requested an opinion on the following question May a local agency such as a county board of supervisors use the “pending litigation” exception of the Ralph M. Brown Act to go into closed session to deliberate

Read More »