• Greg Diamond

    KBurgoyne — the meeting during the Christmas Holiday week was not an “emergency” meeting, which is a “term of art” with a specific meaning under California law. (Originally, I had thought that it had been, but I discovered otherwise while posting a legal challenge to it and removed all but one stray reference to that term in the letter I send to the City Council and officers.)

    Instead, it was a “special” meeting — and the only limitation on what the Mayor can call a special meeting to address on 72 hours notice is the decency and sense of fair play of the Mayor and the special meeting’s other proponents.

    In other words: in this case, there was no limitation on the Mayor at all.

    For those City Council members who were on a carefree holiday when the news broke, the first comment to this OJ post of mine contains the letter that I sent:


    They may also be interested in my analysis of what happened and why:


    I’m not particularly interested in pursuing the claims made in that letter, which was sent and received in advance of the meeting. But if any of the non-minority on the Council would like me to hand it over to the attorney of their choice, I would be happy to do so. My only interest in sending the letter when I did was to show Tinajero, Sarmiento, and Benevides some courtesy on a day when they were otherwise shown none. They can make the most of it even without my further involvement.

  • Paul Lucas

    What a mess.

  • kburgoyne

    If nobody except private individuals could support campaigns, and only up to some reasonable limit, then we wouldn’t have to be questioning the reason for this, would we? Throughout the country we are constantly faced with the questioning of whether any action is being taken for the reasons stated, or whether the reasons stated are merely a lie to cover up responding to bribes from those with money.

    At least this is not another fallacious “emergency” meeting — translation: At least the scheduling of this meeting is not another abuse of the mayor’s power. The previous action still signals there needs to be a crack-down on how little wannabe kingdom builders can exercise their “emergency” powers such that their exercise is limited to true “emergencies”.

  • LFOldTimer

    I remember when the council was in awe of this guy. It was like a rock star walked into their chambers. They swore up and down that he was the best thing since sliced bread. Michele Martinez worshiped the ground he walked on. They paid him like a neurosurgeon. And now they can’t wait to dump him. lol.

    Just more evidence how messed up the SA city government is.

    How much is it going to cost the city to make him walk away? What’s the price of the golden parachute? How many more years left on his contract? The article fails to mention that and it’s an important piece of information.

    • RyanCantor

      And then gave him a raise.

      Then a bonus.

      Now they’re firing him. Probably cutting him a big fat check, too.

      But hey, people get who they vote for.