OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Elk Grove City Council Special Meeting – September 10, 2025

OtherWednesday, September 10, 2025
BodyElkgrove, California
SessionOther
DateWednesday, September 10, 2025
StatusFILED
Video Record

STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE

Transcript — Verbatim
0:01

Thank you, everyone.

0:02

We have reconvened from closed session, and I would like to make the following disclosure.

0:08

By a five to zero vote, the city council authorized and directed the city attorney's office to defend the cases of Umapeg versus the City of Elk Grove and Nixon versus the City of Elk Grove as identified by the case numbers on the City Council agenda.

0:25

And then also by a five to zero vote, the city council authorized the city attorney's office to initiate litigation in one matter.

0:33

The name of the defendants and details are not subject to disclosure at this time.

0:37

Once litigation is filed, this information will be disclosed to any person upon inquiry.

0:43

So we will adjourn the special meeting at 6:04 p.m.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Pending Litigation█████████████████████████████████████████████70%
Procedural███████████████████30%
Summary of Proceedings

Elk Grove City Council Special Meeting – September 10, 2025

The Elk Grove City Council held a special meeting on September 10, 2025, at 5:00 PM at City Hall. The meeting was called to order and immediately went into closed session to discuss anticipated litigation, existing litigation, and a public employee performance evaluation. The council reconvened in open session at 6:04 PM, and the Mayor made the required disclosures under the Brown Act.

Key Outcomes

  • By a 5-0 vote, the City Council authorized and directed the City Attorney’s office to defend the cases of Umipeg v. City of Elk Grove (case number 25CV012369; note: the transcript referred to this as “Umapeg”) and Nixon v. City of Elk Grove (case number 25CV018248) as identified by the case numbers on the agenda.
  • By a 5-0 vote, the City Council authorized the City Attorney’s office to initiate litigation in one matter. The name of the defendants and details are not subject to disclosure at this time; they will be disclosed to any person upon inquiry after litigation is filed.
  • The meeting adjourned at 6:04 PM.

Meeting Transcript

Thank you, everyone. We have reconvened from closed session, and I would like to make the following disclosure. By a five to zero vote, the city council authorized and directed the city attorney's office to defend the cases of Umapeg versus the City of Elk Grove and Nixon versus the City of Elk Grove as identified by the case numbers on the City Council agenda. And then also by a five to zero vote, the city council authorized the city attorney's office to initiate litigation in one matter. The name of the defendants and details are not subject to disclosure at this time. Once litigation is filed, this information will be disclosed to any person upon inquiry. So we will adjourn the special meeting at 6:04 p.m.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com