Shapiro

Shapiro v. San Diego City Council

Good Law
117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 631·2002 Cal. App. LEXIS 2410·2002 Daily Journal DAR 2627·96 Cal. App. 4th 904·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2142
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 5, 2002D037323California7,561 words

Opinion

Opinion

Huffman, J.

The defendant San Diego City Council (City Council) appeals a judgment issued under the Ralph M. Brown Act (Brown Act) (Gov. Code, § 54950 et seq.) to compel it to comply with certain duties under the Brown Act in closed session discussions with its real estate negotiators, concerning the posting of agenda items and the restriction of discussion within such closed sessions to the posted agenda items. (§§ 54956.8, 54954.5, subd. (b), 54954.2, subd. (a).) This action was brought by plaintiff and respondent Melvin Shapiro, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief to require fuller disclosure of the items under discussion in the context of real estate negotiations involving the overall large redevelopment project to create a baseball ballpark in the East Village section of the City of San Diego (the City), as initiated by a 1998 voter-approved proposition.

On appeal, the City Council contends the trial court exceeded the scope of its authority in ordering injunctive relief, and misapplied the Brown Act statutory scheme in ruling upon the scope of the disclosures to be made in connection with closed session real estate negotiations and the scope of the discussions that could…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.