[00:00:01]
[1. CALL TO ORDER]
I'D LIKE TO CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER A LIVE WEBCAST OF THE MEETING MAY BE VIEWED ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE.NOTICE AGENDA AND INFORMATION ON THE CITY OF NASHVILLE CITY'S WEBSITE INFORMS MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT THEY MAY SUBMIT A GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT OR A PUBLIC COMMENT ON A SPECIFIC AGENDA ITEM A NUMBER OF WAYS, EITHER IN PERSON IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER BY SUBMITTING A SALMON COLORED, UH, UH, REQUEST TO ENTER COMMENT Q SLIP, OR EMAILING NO LATER THAN FOUR HOURS BEFORE THE MEETING.
ALL WRITTEN COMMENTS RECEIVED WILL BE DISTRIBUTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL PRIOR TO THE MEETING AND PUBLISHED ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE IF RECEIVED BY THE DEADLINE.
WITH THAT, CAN WE HAVE ROLL CALL PLEASE? GOOD AFTERNOON.
PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND I'LL ASK IF, UM, MEMBER BUSH, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE, PLEASE PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
[4. PUBLIC COMMENT]
OKAY, WITH THAT, WE'LL NOW HEAR PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS SPECIFIC TO THIS AGENDA.UM, AND AS THEY, THEY HAVE TO DO, HAVE TO BE SPECIFIC TO THIS AGENDA, WE'LL BE GIVING TWO MINUTES PER PERSON.
AND DO WE HAVE ANY REQUEST TO SPEAK? WE DO.
OKAY FOR ITEM 5.5, UH, UH, MIA SEVERSON, FOLLOWED BY MIKA POLANCO, FOLLOWED BY LOUISA MCCARTHY.
GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCIL MAYOR.
I HAD SENT EACH OF YOU FROM OUR OFFICE LAST WEEK A LETTER REGARDING ITEM NUMBER 5.5.
5.5 DOES NOT STATE THE MATTER, UH, TO WHICH WHAT IS BEING DISCUSSED.
THERE IS NOTHING TO GIVE ANY FACTS OR CIRCUMSTANCES REGARDING THE INCIDENT, TRANSACTION, OR OCCURRENCE THAT MIGHT RESULT IN LITIGATION AS IS, UH, TYPICAL IN CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE 5 4 9 4, 5 0.5 AND 0.9.
THE CITY COUNCIL'S AGENDA IS DIFFERS DRASTICALLY FROM WHAT YOU FOLKS DID WHEN YOU MAYOR MORRISON TOOK THE LETTER THAT WAS WRITTEN BY YOUR LAWYER, DAN GILLIAN SENT TO YOU AND THEN, UH, RUSHED A SPECIAL MEETING AND THEN ARRANGED TO HAVE IT, UH, PUBLISHED WITH HYPERLINKS.
SO AS TO EMBARRASS MY FIRM'S CLIENTS, MCKAYLA, POLANCO, AND LUISA, UH, MCCARTHY.
THINK YET I GET THE SUSPICION THAT TODAY YOU FOLKS MIGHT BE TALKING ABOUT THAT YOU JUST ANNOUNCED THAT YOU ARE NOT RUNNING FOR OFFICE.
UH, I WOULD SAY THAT PERHAPS YOU'RE RUNNING FROM OFFICE WITH WHAT YOU'RE ABOUT TO DO WITH REGARDS TO, UH, THE CLAIM BY YOUR ASSISTANT.
SO I WOULD ASK, ARE YOU GOING TO ANNOUNCE WHO OR WHAT, WHOSE CLAIM YOU'RE DISCUSSING TODAY? ARE YOU GOING TO ANNOUNCE IT? DO YOU WANNA TELL THE PUBLIC THAT THE PRESS IS HERE? DO YOU WANNA ANNOUNCE IT? AND I WOULD ASK THAT BEFORE YOU GO IN CLOSE SESSION.
UM, LET'S TALK ABOUT YOUR CONFLICTS OF INTEREST.
LOUIS MOLINA, YOU GAVE THE LAWYER YOUR PERSONAL RECORDS, TEXTING HIM IF HE WAS GONNA HELP YOU.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENT WITH THE CLAIM.
OKAY? YOU'RE ALL JUST, YOU TWO ARE DISQUALIFIED.
IF YOU DO DISCUSS IT, YOU SHOULD NOT.
MIKA POLANCO, FOLLOWED BY LOUISA MCCARTHY, FOLLOWED BY DOLE MORRISON.
BY THE WAY, THE TIMER HERE SAID THREE MINUTES, WHICH IS WHY I'M HERE TO ALSO SPEAK ON 5.5.
AND YES, UH, MRS. VERSON SENT EVERYBODY A A, AN EMAIL IN WHICH YOU LOSE MOLINA.
WERE COLLABORATING WITH MARCUS AND WITH JOSIE FLORES CLARK'S ATTORNEY TO SUE THE CITY.
SUPPOSEDLY YOU'RE RUNNING FOR REELECTION.
SUPPOSEDLY YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO BE PROTECTING THE CITY.
AND HERE YOU ARE COLLABORATING WITH RON TO SUE THE CITY.
WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU? MY GOSH, DO THIS.
CAN YOU GUYS NOT PUT TWO, THE TWO, THE TWO TOGETHER? RON, YOUR ATTORNEY,
[00:05:01]
YOU GAVE IT TO JOSIE, OVER 20,000 LICENSED ATTORNEYS IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY, AND YET YOU GIVE HER, YOUR ATTORNEY TO SUE THE CITY, THE CITY THAT YOU SO MUCH LOVE AND YOU LOSE.MOLINA ARE COLLABORATING WITH JOSIE'S ATTORNEY TO SUE THE CITY ON THAT CLAIM.
YOU CAN CHANGE THE NARRATIVE ALL YOU WANT.
BUT THE TRUTH IS, THE TRUTH IS THE TRUTH.
AND WHAT NEEDS TO, WHAT YOU GUYS NEED TO DO IS STOP LYING, IS STOP LISTENING TO THE LIES THAT RON AND JOSIE KEEP TELLING YOU.
THE CITY IS IN FINANCIAL AND MORAL.
IT'S BANKRUPT FINANCIALLY AND MORALLY.
NOW HE HAS TO CLEAN THIS MESS UP.
I AM A TAXPAYER HERE AND I WANT THIS TAXPAYER'S ABUSE.
THE ABUSE OF POWER AND THE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY STOPPED.
AND I WILL NOT STOP AND I WILL KEEP COMING OVER AND OVER AND OVER AS MANY TIMES AS I NEED TO.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR, TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS HAPPENS.
LOUISA MCCARTHY, FOLLOWED BY DORA MORRISON, FOLLOWED BY ALICIA MORRISON.
I'M DEEPLY CONCERNED THIS COUNCIL MAY BE ASKED TO APPROVE A TAXPAYER FUNDED PAYMENTS TO THE MAYOR'S ASSISTANT BASED ON A BOGUS CLAIM INITIATED BY THE MAYOR'S OWN ATTORNEY NOW REPRESENTING JOSIE FLORES CLARK.
IF THAT IS TRUE, IT RAISES SERIOUS CON QUESTIONS ABOUT CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, TRANSPARENCY, AND PUBLIC TRUST.
THE PEOPLE OF THIS CITY EXPECT PUBLIC FUNDS TO BE HANDLED WITH THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF INTEGRITY.
IF YOU EVEN KNOW WHAT THAT IS BEFORE A SINGLE TAXPAYER DOLLAR IS SPENT, THE PUBLIC DESERVES TO KNOW, HAS THE MAYOR AND LOU MOLINA RECUSED THEMSELVES FROM ANY DISCUSSIONS OR DECISIONS INVOLVING HIS OWN ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY? THAT IS SOMETHING FOR YOU TO MAKE SURE THAT IT GETS DONE CORRECTLY.
BECAUSE WE'RE WATCHING TOO, AS AN ELECTED OFFICIAL, A MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER HAS AN OBLIGATION TO PROTECT THE INTEREST OF THE ENTIRE CITY, NOT TO ENGAGE PRIVATELY WITH AN ATTORNEY WHOSE CLIENT MAY BE PURSUING CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY.
IF THAT ATTORNEY HAD QUESTIONS OR NEEDED INFORMATION, THE APPROPRIATE RESPONSE WOULD HAVE BEEN SIMPLE.
DIRECT THEM TO THE CITY ATTORNEY WHO IS THE CITY'S LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE.
IT'S SOMETHING BERKELEY DIDN'T TEACH YOU.
THAT'S EXERCISING COMMON SENSE AND SOUND JUDGMENT WITH THE CITY REPORTEDLY NEAR INSOLVENCY.
EVERY DECISION MUST BE GUIDED BY RESTRAINT, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND THE PROTECTION OF TAXPAYER RESOURCES.
NOT TO QUENCH THE THIRST OF GREED, JOSIE HAS BEEN THREATENING TO SUE THE CITY ANYTIME THINGS DON'T GO HER WAY.
SHE HAS BEEN VERY VOCAL ABOUT THAT FOR YEARS, IS THE REAL REASON.
RON ABANDONED SHIP WAS TO GIVE JOSIE HER LAST BONUS.
DORA MORRISON, FOLLOWED BY ALICIA MORRISON.
GOOD AFTERNOON, CITY COUNCIL DOYLE MORRISON.
AND I'M HERE TO TALK ON 5.5, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE SUBJECT IS OTHER THAN THAT THERE'S LITIGATION.
SO IN LIEU OF TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING THAT I DON'T, IT'S NOT DISCLOSED WHAT IT IS.
I'M GONNA BRING UP THE POINT THAT WHEN YOU HAVE PUBLIC COMMENTS IN THE LITERATURE THAT THE CITY IS, YOU KNOW, HAS IN THEIR DOCUMENTATION THAT WHEN THERE ARE, THERE'S 30 MINUTES FOR A PUBLIC COMMENT AND THAT 30 MINUTES IS DIVIDED BY THE AMOUNT OF SPEAKERS AND THERE SHOULD BE A RATIONALE DISPLAYED ON WHY YOU'RE CUTTING THE TIME FROM THREE MINUTES TO TWO MINUTES.
IF THERE AREN'T THAT MANY PEOPLE SPEAKING, THAT WOULD EXCEED THE 30 MINUTES.
SO IN MY CALCULATIONS, THAT WOULD BE 10 SPEAKERS AT 30 MINUTE OR I MEAN AT THREE MINUTES WOULD BE THE 30 MINUTES.
AND SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND, THIS CONTINUES TO HAPPEN AGAIN AND AGAIN.
AND IF YOU'D LIKE, THE NEXT TIME I COME TO SPEAK, I'LL BRING THAT DOCUMENTATION OF WHAT YOUR CODE, YOU KNOW, YOUR ARTICLES OR CODES SAYS ABOUT UH, SPEAKERS, UM, DURING THE MEETINGS.
SO WITH THAT, THANK YOU FOR LISTENING
[00:10:01]
TO ME AND UH, IF YOU GUYS ARE WILLING TO DISCLOSE WHAT THIS IS ABOUT, THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THE LITIGATION, THEN I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON IT ONCE I KNOW WHAT IT IS.GOVERNMENT CODE TITLE IX POLITICAL REFORM CHAPTER TWO DEFINITIONS, SECTION 8 2 0 4 8 A ONE PUBLIC OFFICIAL MEANS EVERY MEMBER, OFFICER, EMPLOYEE, OR CONSULTANT OF THE STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT AGENCY UNDER CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE TITLE IX POLITICAL REFORM ARTICLE ONE PROHIBITION 8 7 1 0 0.
A PUBLIC OFFICIAL AT ANY LEVEL OF STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT SHALL NOT MAKE PARTICIPATE IN MAKING OR IN ANY WAY ATTEMPT TO USE THE PUBLIC OFFICIAL'S POSITION TO INFLUENCE A GOVERNMENTAL DECISION IN WHICH THE OFFICIAL KNOWS OR HAS REASON TO KNOW THE OFFICIAL HAS FINANCIAL INTEREST SINCE THE PUBLIC HAS NO PUBLISHED INFORMATION.
AS TO ITEM 5.5, SIGNIFICANT EXPOSURE TO LITIGATION.
THE PREAMBLE OF THE BROWN ACT STATES IN SECTION 5 4 9 5 0 CHAPTER ONE, POLICY DECLARATION, PUBLIC COMMISSIONS, BOARDS, COUNCILS AND OTHER LEGISLATIVE BODIES OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES EXIST TO AID IN THE CONDUCT OF THE PEOPLE'S BUSINESS.
THE PEOPLE DO NOT YIELD THEIR SOVEREIGNTY TO THE BODIES THAT SERVE THEM.
THE PEOPLE INSIST ON REMAINING INFORMED TO RETAIN CONTROL OF THE LEGISLATIVE BODIES THEY HAVE CREATED.
THEREFORE, YOUR AUGUST 18TH, 2026 PUBLISHED SPECIAL MEETING FAILS TO PUB PROVIDE KNOWLEDGE TO THE PEOPLE OF WHAT OR WHO THIS LITIGATION INVOLVES PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH TWO, SUBDIVISION D, GOVERNMENT CODE 5 4 9 5 6 0.9.
THIS SECTION GOES ON TO READ IN PARAGRAPH 5G PRIOR TO HOLDING THE CLOSED SESSION.
PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION, THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF THE LOCAL AGENCY SHALL STATE ON THE AGENDA OR PUBLICLY ANNOUNCED THE PARAGRAPH SUBDIVISION D THAT AUTHORIZES THE CLOSED SESSION.
IF THIS SESSION OUTTA TIME, UM, CITY ATTORNEY SKINNER, PLEASE ABIDE BY CODE 6 0 6 7.
COUNSEL DOES WHAT THEY NEED TO DO.
MAYOR, THAT CONCLUDES IN-PERSON PUBLIC COMMENT.
[5. CLOSED SESSION]
WITH THAT I WILL TURN IT OVER TO OUR CITY ATTORNEY TO CLOSED SESSION.UM, TODAY WE HAVE FIVE MATTERS.
UM, ON THE AGENDA FOR CLOSED SESSION.
ITEM ONE 5.1 RELATES TO A WORKERS' COMPENSATION CLAIM AND IS BEING HEARD PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 5 4 9 5 4 0.5.
THE CLAIMANT'S NAME IS STEVEN AKAS.
UM, THE SECOND ITEM 5.2 IS A CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL ON EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH ONE OF SUBDIVISION D UH, OF SECTION 5 4 9 5 6 0.9 INVOLVING UM, THE PLAINTIFF, EDEN CORTEZ.
THE NEXT ONE, 5.3 IS A CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL AGAIN ON EXISTING LITIGATION.
UM, AND PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH ONE OF SUBDIVISION D OF SECTION 5 4 9 5 6 0.9, UM, AND THE NAME IS NETS, UH, ETAL.
THE NEXT ONE, 5.4 IS A CONFERENCE WITH ROYAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS, UH, THAT IS BEING BROUGHT PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 5 4 9 5 6 0.8.
THE LAST ITEM, SIGNIFICANT EXPOSURE TO LITIGATION IS BEING BROUGHT PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH TWO SUBDIVISION D OF GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 5 4 9 5 6 0.9.
AND THERE ARE ONE CASE TO BE HEARD.
TO BE CLEAR, A LEGISLATIVE BODY MAY HOLD CLOSED SESSION WHEN A POINT HAS BEEN REACHED WHERE IN THE OPINION OF THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF THE LOCAL AGENCY AND ON THE ADVICE OF ITS LEGAL COUNSEL BASED ON EXISTING FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, THERE IS NOW A SIGNIFICANT EXPOSURE TO POTENTIAL LITIGATION AGAINST A LOCAL AGENCY.
IN MY OPINION, THIS ITEM HAS BEEN, THERE'S REACHED A POINT WHERE THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT EXPOSURE TO LITIGATION.
THERE ARE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES RELATED TO WHAT IS NOT LITIGATION, BUT MAY BECOME LITIGATION AGAINST THE CITY.
THOSE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES ARE PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATIONS THAT ARE NOT TO BE, UM, LISTED UNDER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 5 4 9 5 6 0.95 E FIVE OR UNDER SUBDIVISION F AND I APOLOGIZE IF I DIDN'T GET THOSE EXACTLY RIGHT, BUT THOSE ARE THE CODE SECTIONS.
UM, AND IN MY LEGAL ASSESSMENT AND AN OPINION, THIS MATTER NEEDS TO BE HEARD IN CLOSED SESSION TO ACT ADEQUATELY APPRISE THE COUNSEL OF THE LEGAL ISSUES RELATED TO THE, UM, TO THE PENDING MATTER.
NOT PENDING MATTER, BUT PENDING ISSUE.
WITH THAT WE ARE IN THE CLOSED SESSION.
[00:15:01]
WILL COME BACK OUT TO ADJOURN AND WE'LL BE REPORTING OUTTA CLOSED SESSION AT THE END OF OUR RECORD COUNCIL MEETING.AND WE HAVE, UH, WE HAVE EVERYONE AT THE DIOCESE WITH THE EXCEPTION OF UH, VICE MIR, UH, LOU MOLINA.
UM, WITH THAT WE ARE COMING OUTTA CLOSED SESSION AND WE ARE NOT ADJOURNED.
WE WILL BE CONTINUING TILL, UH, AFTER THE, UH, COUNCIL MEETING.
AND SO WITH THAT, UH, WE WILL BE BACK IN ABOUT FIVE TO 10 MINUTES TO START THE REGULAR MEETING ON ANOTHER DATE.
THEN I'M GONNA CONTINUE OVER CLOSED SESSION.
SO WE WILL, WE WILL RE REOPEN CLOSED SESSION.
AND WHAT IS YOUR THOUGHTS AT THIS TIME? WE ALL KIND OF THOUGHT, WELL THIS WAS GONNA, THIS MEETING WAS GONNA BE OVER A LITTLE EARLIER THAN THIS, BUT I KNOW THE AGENDA SEEMED LIGHT.
IT ALWAYS DOES, AND WE GET, GET INTO A LOT OF QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSIONS MORE.
I WOULD LIKE FOR, YOU KNOW, I WOULD, I WOULD ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO PLEASE.
SO LET THIS, EVEN IF IT IS FOR A SPECIAL MEETING IN THE COMING WEEKS TO, UH, FURTHER DISCUSS THE ITEM.
THOUGHT WE COULD EITHER, IF WE WANT TO, UH, HOLD OFF.
I, I'M GOOD TO, YEAH, I'M GOOD TO CONTINUE THE CLOSE SESSION.
WE COULD EITHER DO THAT TONIGHT, UH, UH, OR WE CAN HOLD THAT OFF AND DO IT ON, ON ANOTHER, FOR ANOTHER MEETING.
AND AS A POINT OF CLARIFICATION, SHOULD WE HOLD OFF ON THE LAST ITEM I'LL REPORT OUT ON THE OTHER FLOOR, RIGHT? YES, I'M FINE TO, OKAY.
DO WE HAVE TO, WE WOULD NEED TO MAKE A MOTION A SECOND AND I MAKE A MOTION TO CONTINUE TO MOVE ON TO CLOSED SESSION.
WHEN YOU SAY MOVE ON, WE'RE ADJOURNING OUT RETURN.
CAN YOU HELP ME WITH THIS? YES.
SO THE MOTION WOULD BE, UM, TO, UH, HAVE ITEM 5.5 HEARD SEPARATELY AT ANOTHER TIME? YES.
NO, I'M SAYING I WOULD BE FINE WITH CONTINUING OKAY.
INTO CLOSED SESSION AT THE CONCLUSION OF THIS MEETING RIGHT NOW.
SO IF YOU WANT TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION, WE WOULD JUST GO RECESS BACK IN RIGHT NOW.
IF THERE'S ANOTHER MOTION THEN WE WON'T.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION FOR THE ITEM TO BE CARRIED OVER.
OH, YOU A MOTION MADE A MOTION NOW.
UM, THE MOTION TO CONTINUE THAT WAS DONE IN CLOSED SESSION IS BEING BROUGHT OUT HERE.
AT THIS POINT IN TIME WE WILL RECESS BACK INTO CLOSED SESSION PURSUANT TO THAT MOTION.
IF THERE IS A DIFFERENT MOTION TO CARRY THAT ITEM OVER AND CONTINUE IT, THEN IT WILL BE HEARD ON A DIFFERENT DATE AND I WILL DO A REPORT OUT ON THE OTHER FOUR ITEMS. I, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR IT TO BE CONTINUED TO A FUTURE DATE.
AND JUST A, JUST AN OBSERVATION.
UH, SOME OF US ARE YAWNING HERE AT THIS MOMENT AND I THINK THIS DISCUSSION WILL TAKE A FEW HOURS.
I DON'T THINK IT'S WISE FOR US TO START HAVING IT NOW.
JUST MY OBSERVATION FROM PREVIOUS CONVERSATIONS WE'VE HAD IN CLOSED SESSION WHEN WE START AT NINE OR 10 O'CLOCK, I THINK IT'S UNWISE TO DISCUSS IT AND I'M OPEN TO HAVE SPECIAL MEETINGS LATER THIS WEEK, NEXT WEEK, THE FOLLOWING WEEK WHENEVER.
I JUST DON'T THINK IT'S A WISE THING TO DO.
SO THAT WAS IN THE FORM OF A MOTION.
IS THAT, IS THAT WHAT I HEARD? UH, I WILL MAKE THAT IN THE FORM OF A MOTION.
I, I THOUGHT I WAS HEARING YOU SAY.
IS THERE, CAN WE, IS THERE AND CAN WE DO IT TO A DATE TO BE AGREED UPON BY ALL TIME SENSITIVE COUNCIL MEMBERS? TIME SENSITIVE? YES.
WE JUST DON'T HAVE TO ARRIVE AT THAT TIME RIGHT NOW.
UH, IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT? I'LL SECOND IT MA.
THERE IS, THERE'S A, I HATE TO SCREEN THIS TONIGHT.
UH, OKAY, SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND AND THAT IS TO, UH, HOLD OFF ON TO CONTINUE ITEM 5.5 TO ANOTHER DATE AGREED UPON BY ALL COUNSEL.
AND THEN, AND WE'LL BE REPORTING OUT ON THE REMAINING ONES NOW.
MOTION, WE WE HAVE TO, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SEC.
NOW WE NEED TO SEE IF WE NEED TO VOTE.
MOTION PASSES BY THREE TO TWO.
VOTE WITH COUNCIL MEMBER BUSH AND MOLINA VOTING NO.