Citizen Portal
Sign In

City Council adjourns into closed session to discuss IBEW labor talks and ACLU letter alleging possible violations

5670982 · August 5, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
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

At 5:03 p.m. the City Council went into closed session to discuss labor negotiations with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 1245 and to consider potential litigation after the American Civil Liberties Union sent a letter requesting review of certain city activities, the city attorney said.

The City Council adjourned into closed session at 5:03 p.m. to discuss labor negotiations with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Local 1245 and anticipated litigation after the city attorney said the city had received a letter from the American Civil Liberties Union.

The city attorney told the council the closed session items were being called under California Government Code section 54957.6 for labor negotiations and California Government Code section 54956.9 for anticipated litigation. The attorney identified the agency's designated representatives for the labor item as Stephanie Su Fuentes, the human resources director, and Andrew Murray, the city manager. The employee organization named was IBEW Local 1245.

The matter involving the ACLU arose from a letter the city received asking officials to examine certain city activities that the ACLU said might expose the city to litigation. The city attorney said that letter was the reason the council planned to discuss “significant exposure to litigation” in closed session.

Mayor Sourse and council members present conducted a roll call before the city clerk; the mayor noted the vice mayor and two council members were absent for the start of the meeting. No public details or votes on the substance of the labor negotiations or the anticipated litigation were disclosed in the public portion of the meeting; the council simply recessed into closed session.

Because California law prohibits public disclosure of most closed-session deliberations on pending litigation and labor negotiation strategy, the council did not provide further information on either item at the time it went into closed session.