Okay, now we're ready to start.
We need to finish the roll call, though. Yes. Okay, council member Roussen.
Here.
Council member Johnson. Here.
Council member Nagan gas. Here.
Vice-Mayor Penrose. Here. Mayor Radik. Here. We have a party.
We have one public comment.
Yes. We're going to vote.
We're going to vote.
We vote. We vote. We vote. We vote. We vote. We vote.
Close session, aye.
We have item 4A conference with Labour negotiators.
for the Community Adversion,
pursue into government code section 549576,
for V conference on legal counsel and existing litigation,
pursuant to govern around section 54956.9.
Up section D1, I have a foresee Cambridge
of Legal Counsel on anticipated litigation
and for the account to a legal counsel
and anticipate the litigation.
And do we have any public comment
and close sessions by those?
We have one in person who's always waiting in any that are online. Please raise your hand.
If you would like to speak
Right here, you can sit down if you'd like
Not a matter of
How requested that he have more than three minutes to speak.
Well, our meeting starts at 7 o'clock. How about
You know, give it to three
My specific west is just that it's a rather than a hat on. Hopefully that you've
been very small minutes of the concise.
Well, I'm going to put the right approach to the tens of thousands of dollars that
things can end up costing, which we want to avoid every once in a while.
I believe.
Okay.
I'm going to start the time now.
You're right.
Thank you.
First, May I ask, you know, have all the council members seen both the mayor letter from Brian
and the response letter from the city's locker.
What do you say?
They've been sent to them.
I'm asking if they've actually seen it with them.
Well, so why don't you get to public comment?
This isn't really a question and sort of type of situation.
It's still in any communications that I would
be sentenced to the council or attorney point privilege.
So it's better for you to just start your public comment
given the time.
My point here, Denise, is that the council is weighing your advice against other things.
I understand that you're advising them not to listen to potentially other things, so I appreciate that you're in that position.
So basically, the public interest is served by this going to the voters, it's going to the voters.
The public interest is served by the voters, having hearing the arguments from both sides
and being able to weigh them in the side, and this will extinguish the controversy that
exists in our time.
So, the fact that the city attorney, you know, is basically saying that the city court exceeded
her authority in writing on August 3, sending me a letter that said the deadline, counting
and not calling attention to anything else and in that letter saying these are the rules.
And then when I came in on the 10th for the recommendation in the letter and I don't know if all of you have seen
the letter that the city clerk had sent me on August 3rd but if not I have a couple of copies like
you guys can pass around later if you're just starting to hear it. It said the county deadline
I said, this is the list we send anybody asking what arguments, county deadline for all
arguments in August 11th, we recommend submitting any written argument paperwork to the
City Park's office.
Prior to this deadline to ensure all requirements have been met again in the office, 345,
Tuesday, what they afternoon, the clerk was not in the deputy clerk contacted her upon discovering
the discrepancy between the City Council Resolution and the letter written to me by the
this depending on what the city court told. And after conferring, they didn't say to me,
you got an hour and a quarter buddy, hurry up, they said, we'll accept this tomorrow.
But I came back with it tomorrow. They said as soon as possible tomorrow, I came in with it after
lunch, the city court, and the city deputy court together, we'll start going through it.
They pointed to a couple of nits, if you will, that are not an issue here, and they were in
process of accepting it, they gave me file stamped copies of what I submitted, and what
having called Denise, they then got into the situation where, okay, Denise said he can't
accept it. And at that point, they said, okay, we're going to have to figure this out. We will
get back to you. Right? So, in the course of that, I should also mention that the court carefully
examined, the argument submitted, out of the words, saw the formatting, said, no, didn't
raise any issues about the formatting.
It was in the process of accepting the argument.
So I asked, well, please, while you're figuring this out, send it to the county, but they
have it.
It's the 11th.
The county deadline is the 11th.
They may just run with it.
If the other side says, oh, they came on the 11th instead of the 10th, you know, maybe they
can raise an issue.
Then we get to all go to a judge, like, don't be raised by them.
One of the public interests being the city's arguments on both sides to the voters, that's what
we're asking finally to be accomplished. To be told that the city that the county can't meet these
deadlines if the city asks it to. Probably they're actually have a hard deadline when they send
things off to the printer, whether it requires a judge or a lawyer or whether it requires a city council
resolution directing the court to ask them, we're simply in action by this council informally directing the court to ask them.
You know, that, a pretty large earnings is very doable.
They make progress the timeline if they need you.
But the public interest is see these things in the argument.
So in the letter that was sent back to us, I also wish to point out that there's actually some things that are just not true.
you know, to say the Mr. Wagner was fully aware of the August 10th deadline is simply not true.
To say that the argument did not comply with the city's formatting requirements of which Mr. Wagner was also aware.
It was not true. The letter, the ignores that the city clerk wrote August 11th and no other date in the email address.
third branch of approval is a bit tomorrow on August 10th to person. Well, she was on the phone,
the in person was with her deputy. But the two of them confirmed, I was told this. And then
tentatively accepted the formatting on August 11th. But for your information, I went and took the
timestamp copies here to county elections before 5 p.m. on Tuesday. They have copies on
that they know were submitted here.
So if they raise a question of, you know,
if there's an error and it's to be corrected somehow,
they do know that it was, in fact, brought in by their deadline.
So the news of the things I asked that, you know, the council finds some way,
you know, to let us keep forward.
If it takes a little bit of time, you know, let's go through that.
If you wish to call me back in,
for any questions, I'll be available to you to finish the procession.
Thank you very much.
I'll check and see if there's any other questions.
Yeah, I'll just stand for the statement.
It's not raised to someone.
Dan, do you want to talk at all?
Dan, three.
Yeah, so Dan pulled on a minute
or Matthew's checking for other public commenters.
Dan, Alex,
Dan, you're available to speak.
I would just make it quick that I agree with the general sentiment of the previous speaker.
Thank you.
The agrees with the previous speaker.
Oh, that's it.
All right.
Thank you.
Yeah.
No, that's fine.
But before we go into closed session,
Vice Mayor Penro,
if you want to make an announcement about your attendance,
be at the just cause circumstance.
I don't know.
I'm from the hospital with pneumonia,
and I'm doing a lot better than I'm very tired.
So I'm here for the closed session.
Okay.
You can never.
Okay.
So we will end the open portion of this meeting and move into the private portion.
So Deborah, the second length that I sent you when you could log into it down.
Okay.
I'll take that out of this.
And I think I'll let's stay on the phone.
And that way, if the audio is still an issue, you can just roll right in.
Sorry. Thank you.