City Council - Special Meeting

Oh, thank you.

ALL RIGHT, WE'RE READY TO START WHENEVER.

THE CLOCK ON THE WALL IS A LITTLE FAST. IT'S ALMOST, YEAH, LIKE TWO OR THREE MINUTES.

Good afternoon. It's Tuesday, September 1st, 2026. We're at Carmel-by-the-Sea City Hall and I'd like to call this special meeting of the Carmel-by-the-Sea City Council to order at 3.32 p.m. City Clerk, would you please call the roll? Sure.

Councilmember Barron?

Here.

Councilmember Booter?

Here.

Mayor Pro Tem Delz?

Here.

Councilmember Drammel? Here. Mayor Byrne?

Here. All are present. City Clerk, would you please read the special meeting public comment?

During special City Council meetings, public comments are permitted on items listed on the agenda. After each item on the agenda is introduced, the Mayor will invite public comment on that item. Each speaker has three minutes to speak unless otherwise adjusted by the mayor. While stating your name is optional, it helps to identify speakers in the meeting minutes. Remote or in-person participants who do not comply with the requirements of the Brown Act will be muted.

Thank you. For this special meeting, we have one order of business. Order of business are agenda items that require City Council discussion, debate, direction to staff, and or action. Today we have a we're going to be discussing a letter from Vince Kohler, received August 29th, 2026. And they're going to request direction from us after we get the staff report. And we're also going to have a statement from the city attorney, I believe. Correct?

Well, I'll be presenting the staff report.

You're going to do the staff report and your comment. Okay, good. Go ahead.

Okay, thank you, Mayor. So as council knows, on August 24th of 2026, there was a closed session of the City Council on the subject of public employee appointment for the position of city administrator. The closed session on August 24th was authorized by Government Code Section 54957, which allows closed sessions for the subject of considering the appointment of a public employee. Prior to the closed session on August 24th, there was a discussion about the subject of the closed session. Acting Assistant City Administrator Marissa Bermudez CONFIRMED THAT THERE WOULD BE PUBLIC INPUT ON THE RECRUITING PROCESS TO BE HELD AT THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 1, 2026, WHICH IS TODAY. AND IN FACT, THE AGENDA PACKET FOR THE SEPTEMBER 1ST MEETING WAS RELEASED ON AUGUST 26TH, AND THAT INCLUDES THE STAFF REPORT WITH THE FOUR ATTACHMENTS THAT I'LL MENTION IN A MOMENT. THE AGENDA ITEM, AS DESCRIBED, in the September 21 agenda, and I'll quote it. It is to receive an update regarding the status of the city administrator recruitment, provide direction to staff regarding the recruitment process, schedule, and next steps, and consider the adoption of Resolution 2026-067, establishing a revised salary range for the city administrator position. So there are four attachments to the staff report for your regular meeting later. They are all available when we get to that item during your regular meeting for council questions, public input, and council direction following public input. Those attachments include the resolution with respect to establishing a salary range for the position of city administrator, a salary survey is the second attachment, The third attachment is a proposed revised schedule with two options for the recruiting timeline. And the fourth attachment is a draft city administrator brochure. Prior to going into closed session on August 24th, I recommended that the council not make any decisions and defer those decisions until after community input at the city council meeting scheduled for September 1 of 2026. Now, on August 29th, 2026, the city received a letter from Vince Kohler, which is attachment one to this staff report. And in it, Mr. Kohler takes the position that the closed session of August 24th, 2026, on the topic of working with the city recruiter and staff to develop a recruiting brochure at the closed session on August 24th, was a violation of the Brown Act. There is legal support for the closed session that was held on August 24th, 2026, in my opinion. Further, there was no action taken by the City Council in the closed session on August 24th, 2026, as the contents of the draft recruiting brochure and the draft timeline are subject to revisions following public input at the September 1, 2026 City Council meeting. However, in order to avoid any issues on this subject, there are two recommendations which are included in the staff report. One is a motion confirming that the draft recruiting brochure for the city administrator position and the draft recruiting timeline will be subject to revisions during the deliberations by the city council following public input during the regular city council meeting as scheduled on September 1, 2026. And the second recommendation is a motion authorizing the city attorney to respond to the letter from Vince Kohler consistent with the discussion in this staff report. So that is the staff report. I'm available to respond if there's any questions.

Okay. Any questions for counsel from the dais?

Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Brian, for that. I was wondering if you could explain the whole cure and correct process and what we as a council would need to do today if I understand we need to basically push the clock back and as if that meeting never occurred to make it to cure this process.

We don't need to push the clock back because that is impossible. It's history and we can't change history. But what we can do is what is recommended here in this staff report is to confirm that both the draft recruiting brochure and the draft recruiting timeline are going to be subject to revisions, which was made clear at the time of the closed session, prior to the closed session, and that those revisions would be during deliberations by the council, following public input during the regular meetings. So that is the action that is being recommended.

Brian, can you speak a little bit more about, you know, I think you often mention how the Brown Act mentions the appointment of a public employee. Can you talk a little bit more about how broadly that could be construed? Because I have to confess that on a plain reading of it myself, my impression always was that generally, you can meet in a closed session to talk about pending litigation. You can talk about negotiations related to employment or negotiations related to a real estate deal. So tell me, help me, help me understand, like, is there some case law? Like where does the, how does the, that word appointment of a city employee, how are we, on what basis are we expanding the definition of that to include things like, you know, the timeline for the recruitment, the candidate profile, et cetera?

Well, Government Code Section 54957 does say consider the appointment. However, the council obviously cannot make the appointment in closed session. That's something that has to happen in an open session. Unfortunately, government code section 54957 or any other provision in the government code does not define what the words consider the appointment means. When you say expanding the definition, I do not believe that the closed sessions that have been held by the city council are expanding the definition of what those words mean. I believe that the council properly considered those items in closed session as part of considering the appointment. I know that there's dispute regarding that, including the letter from Mr. Kohler, which is why I've made the recommendation I have in the staff report to confirm what was made clear at the closed session and would be made which would be confirmed today if the council takes the action that's recommended, namely that any action with respect to the approval of the brochure or the approval of the timeline would only happen after public input, which that will be our opportunity today to do that.

Jeff, do you have any questions? Okay, let's take it out for public comment. We have three online folks. Anybody in the chamber would like to make a public comment? We have two here. No? All right. Okay, Vince, go ahead. Hello.

Can you guys hear me?

We can hear you now.

Thank you. Hello, Mayor Byrne and members of the City Council. I appreciate that you called this meeting so quickly. I think that reflects the seriousness of this matter and helps avoid further delay in recruiting our next city administrator. I submitted my cure or correct letter in the spirit of helping the council resolve this promptly. My concern is good governance, compliance with our sunshine laws and the integrity of this important recruitment. Brown Act violations I deal with cities all over the state all the time happen, and they usually do without ill intent and sometimes because of incorrect advice. That's why the Act provides this straightforward cure or correct process, so that the public body can fix a mistake without any unnecessary litigation. I do have to take issue with the staff report in this case. It states that the August 24th closed session was authorized by government code, the section that the attorney mentioned, which permits a closed session to, quote, consider the appointment of a public employee. Yes, the Brown Act permits the appointment of a public employee and certain aspects of that to happen in closed session, but not what you guys apparently did, which is the consideration of the development of a brochure, a timeline, a salary schedule. None of those actions are permitted to be in closed session. I also don't believe that the proposed cure of saying that the public discussion of drafts that were developed privately cured the violation in this case. If that were true, then you could close all sessions all the time, just present draft documents and have them be debated in public. That's clearly not the intent of the act. Since submitting my letter, I've learned that there appears to have been an earlier closed session on August 4th concerning the same recruitment. If that session also addressed the brochure timeline criteria of other process matters, the cure must reach back to August 4th rather than only August 24th. The bad news is that the council staff and recruiters may have operated for nearly a month without the required public deliberation. The good news is that the cure remains straightforward. It's what I've proposed. My father used to ask, do you want to do it fast or do you want to do it right? Trying to save time by moving public business behind closed doors rarely saved times. The quickest path forward now is to correct the process fully and resume on a sound legal foundation. As I stated in my letter, there are seven steps. Rescind all collective directions. As the attorney said, you can't rewind the clock, but you can actually. remove all materials that were developed since you went into closed session from consideration. The public, you should not present it. The public has obviously seen it. You should not present it. You should refrain from disseminating other materials that were produced in closed sessions. You should, you know, place the recruitment process criteria timeline and brochure on a properly noticed public meeting agenda, which I think you have done, so that cure could be resolved today. And as I stated else in the letter, you should do that and preserve all notes and minutes and so forth. If the cure reaches back only to August 24th and the August, then all what will happen is you'll get another cure or correct demand letter. And in the interest of efficiency, I ask you to address both sessions today and restart the process with a clean slate. Thank you. And I'm available to answer questions.

Thank you, Vince. I don't see any other hands up. Ian, did you want to make a comment?

Yes.

Go ahead. Ian, is your hand up or not? Yes. Go ahead, Ian. I can't hear you yet.

Ian, we can't hear you if you're talking.

Now, can you hear me? We can. Okay. I apologize. I just, yeah, no, we, we need to follow the Brown Act exists to maintain transparency, which in turn creates trust in the governmental process. And above all, I believe it's council's foremost priority to maintain the public's trust in the goings on in this municipality. So I appreciate that, that there's a, an urgency, which, you know, I will, you know, hear, but I also think that above all, you need to maintain public's trust. And when the Brown Act gets disregarded, public trust is eroded. So I wholeheartedly endorse Vince's actions and hope you will follow that. Thank you.

Thank you, Ian. Anyone else online wish to speak? Seeing none, we'll close public comment and we'll bring it back to the council for discussion and perhaps advice from council. Anybody have anything to say? Comments? Jeff?

I'm prepared to take the action that's recommended in the staff report.

Okay. Any further comment, Hans?

Yeah, it's an interesting position because basically... Can you talk about it? Yes, I can, Andrea. We're in an interesting position because our city attorney is giving us advice and in some ways we always want to follow the city attorney's advice. I'm also conscious of the fact that public trust is extremely important and I don't think that there was anything done in closed session that would be difficult to recreate if that's what they're asking for. Like we have the item agendized tonight. So if the question is basically, why don't we start as close as you can start from scratch and say, okay, let's talk about what the timeline for this recruitment should be. Let's talk about, um, what, uh, what qualities we're looking for in a city administrator. If the people are telling us that they would like to hear the five of us discuss that in public, I think that that would be fine. I think we could probably do it relatively quickly. And that's, I think that that would be my suggestion since it's already agendized for tonight. And then we can move forward with everyone rowing in the same direction, feeling good about the process. I hear that.

Alessandra?

Thank you, Mayor. I agree with what Han said. I think the public trust is extremely important, and we have to do this right, and we have to make sure that this whole process is not tainted. It's just too important, and we cannot do this wrong. So whatever we need to do to, you know, we can't technically roll back the clock, but at least we can have the discussion for those items, such as the timeline, the qualities, and just the brochure in general. when we have our open session later on in this meeting to hopefully be able to quote unquote undo any of the mistakes that were made. I know Hans and I were concerned about going into closed session at that meeting on the 24th, but we didn't have the votes. You know, it was a two to two tie. So we went ahead with it, but frankly, it was material that was discussed that could have been at an open meeting.

So, and I was not here for the last closed session. So the, so this is an open session. Let's clarify that.

Yes.

And would we be, assuming we're going to proceed with what was in the staff report, are we doing that now before 430? That's what's proposed. Yes. So we're not waiting until 4.30 to do that. We're going to do it right now.

No, what's proposed is to do it at 4.30.

I might be, maybe I misunderstood your question. What's being proposed at this meeting, this 3.30 meeting, is what's in the staff report for the 3.30 meeting. With respect to what's in the regular agenda, that's proposed to be discussed at the regular meeting.

So that's where we will, I'm just sorry, I'm confused. We will be discussing... essentially the products, the work products of closed session meetings, as well as interviews that our recruiters had with each of us individually and with others. And all those things went into the formation of any work product we have so far.

And public letters that have been received on this subject.

Yes. So, I mean, that work product... I do believe contains the summation of all the conversations that were in. Of course, I wasn't in the second meeting, so I can't necessarily say that. But I would believe that to be true. Brian, you were saying we didn't do anything wrong, so we don't need to cure. But you're also suggesting belt and suspenders, let's perform a cure. And okay, let's perform the cure. So I'm with you, Hans, now that I understand it.

And we received a public comment today saying that the cure needs to go back further than the 24th or we'll get another letter.

But I think it would go back. I think de facto it goes back to the beginning of this process.

Yeah. And then the question is, are we prepared in the open meeting today? Because Wendy has been leading this, our recruiter. Is she prepared to do that today? Basically, she's given us ideas from the beginning. can we go back to those ideas and get public comment, and then we give our comments again, and we produce the product, probably similar to what we have, but perhaps different. We fully intended for it to be different after public comment to begin with. And we even have a meeting scheduled for Thursday, I believe, correct? Okay, so we have two public sessions. One's sort of a town hall format, I believe. So we're fully prepared to have as much public comment as possible. the public wants to make, and I'm okay with that. How do we, I just, how do we do that? How do we document it in your recommendations for motions? Can we expand your motion?

You could add to the recommendation. You could request that Wendy Brown be requested at the meeting tonight to provide a statement of where the process, the recruiting process, and the timeline stood prior to August 4th and allow the public to comment upon the status as of that time. Okay. Could I just ask you a question?

Go ahead.

Yes, please.

That public meeting that we're having on Friday, I thought that was more of a community meeting. That's not an actual council meeting, or is it? Marissa, would you be able to clarify that for us?

So essentially, essentially Council has the opportunity at the regular meeting this afternoon after 4.30 with the agenda item that's, well, the item that's on the agenda to have a full discussion of everything that's happened up until this point. So everything's open for discussion. The brochure's open for discussion, the timeline's open for discussion, the profile of the candidate's open for discussion. So essentially that conversation that's happening after 4.30 opens up the entire discussion that's happened thus far, which should serve as, sorry, I just blanked out on the term that you've been utilizing. Not a fix, but a cure. Cure for, Brian, you're going to have to help me here.

Cure and correct.

Cure for the perceived Brown Act violations. Yes. The meeting on Friday is intended for the community, but if council chooses to attend, we'll have to notice the meeting as a special meeting, and then council has the ability to participate as well with the community. So essentially there are two opportunities, both this afternoon and Friday, to have the entire discussion about the recruitment again.

Does that help? Yes. So to get back to the point that I heard you asking about before, the way this matter was agendized would be a discussion of a letter and request for direction from counsel. So there are the two recommendations, and I still think that those are appropriate. If you wish, you could also take action today in this meeting to request that Wendy Brown, in her presentation this afternoon, to explain where the process was prior to the August 4th City Council meeting. And she can do that and allow the public to hear what she has to say, comment on it, have counsel ask questions, and whatever other process is appropriate. So like it's already been observed, we can't change history. If the point is to see where the process stood at certain points of time, then I'm sure Wendy Brown's very familiar with all that. It's been something that she's been working on. So she could provide the council, remind the council and the public of where that process stood at each point and then allow public comment on it. Can I take a stab at a motion?

Go ahead. All right, I'm gonna move that we set the brochure, which is the work product that was the culmination of these disputed closed sessions aside. And that we tonight, in the item that's agendized for this topic, we discuss with Wendy leading us through the process. the timeline for this recruitment, the content that would go into the brochure, most notably the candidate profile, the projects that we wanted to highlight. Salary range, which is another subject. And then have Wendy take the discussion that we have in public tonight and go and... the input from the community on Friday and then go and produce a brochure. It might wind up looking very, very similar to the brochure that's been made, but I think that that would be the right approach. So that would be my motion.

I'll second it, but I just wanted to ask, are we going to set a date for when she comes back?

Yeah, there's a, There's a whole item on the timeline, and I have some thoughts on the timeline, but I do think it might make sense for us to... Well, I think we probably have to have just a quick meeting once the brochure comes back to be able to send it out into the world. So I don't know, maybe on Monday. I don't know if people have time for that, but we could talk about that later. Either now or then.

Or I know Monday is Labor Day.

Oh, yes.

Tuesday afternoon, for example. I personally have meetings Tuesday morning.

I think that should just be included in the timeline discussion. Otherwise, we're going back where we were.

Okay. I still stand by seconding the motion.

I don't understand the date of the Tuesday meeting as part of the motion.

No, it's not part of the motion. I will amend my motion to say that we will reconvene in open session to approve whatever brochure Wendy creates after hearing our public discussion tonight.

So I won't support that. I think that that decision, I think the decision of how to proceed with regards to an updated brochure should be made at 430. And I don't see why we need to make that decision now. I think we can make, I think we can do exactly the same thing after we've had the 430 discussion. I guess my point is there's going to be a community meeting. So I think that that, so that's, I think that that discussion with respect, I think that that discussion will happen at 430. And I think the results of what we decide with respect to the brochure and how we're going to put out the brochure, whether we need another council meeting or not, that can be decided at 4.30. And I don't mean to say that, I'm not saying that we don't need another council meeting to do that, but I think we should wait to, if we're going to talk about the timeline at 4.30, which we apparently are, because that says schedule in the agenda item, then the acceptance or confirmation or whatever of the brochure is part of that schedule. And that time should be... Yeah, I'll take it out of my motion. Okay.

I think we have it clean now.

So I just want to make sure then that we know what the motion is because there's been some discussion since it was originally made. I made notes, but perhaps you want to restate what the motion is so we don't have to kind of figure that out.

Yeah, the motion is to set the brochure, which was the work product that came out of these disputed closed sessions aside. and to have the discussions that culminated in that brochure on those topics occur in public. Those topics would include the timeline for the recruitment, the candidate profile, the, we already talked about the salary range. Salary range. And the highlighted projects and areas of focus for a new city administrator. have that discussion in public tonight when the agendized item comes up and then have Wendy create a brochure based on the discussion that we have in public combined with all of the additional research that she's done. My understanding is that the conversation she's had with us are totally fine under the Brown Act because we didn't have them together and she just aggregated them. And so she can include all of that discussions we have with the community, produce a new brochure based on that feedback. So that's my motion.

I'll second it.

The only thing I would add is that the salary range, you were in closed session under the labor negotiation section. It wasn't 54957, it was 54957.6. So I do think that There was no question that you could be having that discussion. Okay. But I... So you can take the salary range part out of the motion. But I do think that... Let me... Now that you've said that, I think you can leave the salary range discussion in, but... I guess my question is, are you suggesting that, for example, tonight in the open session, there's an item on the agenda for a resolution to approve the salary range? And that has to happen at a regular meeting. So if, and as I said, I think the salary range was appropriately agendized under that code section.

Yeah, I don't mean to cast any aspersions on the process for the salary range.

That's why I kind of, I was looking at Dale when you mentioned it. It's on. Yeah, my understanding was that that was done completely properly. Yes.

All right, so then you're taking the salary range out. Out of my motion.

That discussion is going to happen tonight as an agenda item.

Yes. Yes. And then I guess the other question would be whether the balance of the agenda item scheduled for later tonight is going to be held, or is that going to be deferred until September 4th? Tonight. Tonight. Okay. All right. So I think we have the motion. Nova, you have it?

I think so.

You think? Well, that's... Let me reread what I wrote.

It says, motion by Councilmember Booter to set the brochure aside, which was the work product of the last closed session.

Disputed closed session.

Disputed closed session. Last two disputed closed sessions. Last two closed sessions. And have council discuss it during a regular meeting tonight, which includes the recruitment... timeline the content of the brochure, the candidate profile, the projects to highlight, have community input gathered from the September 4th workshop, and then make a new brochure. Is that it? And then reconvene in an open session to approve the brochure. based on today's open session and the community meeting on Friday?

I don't think the community meeting has to be in this motion, because that happens after this.

OK. Yeah, it's not in this motion. We're going to have a discussion about the community meeting and whether there's a future council meeting to ratify the brochure. We'll have that discussion. in the topic tonight.

We're giving feedback as a group with public and council to Wendy to produce a brochure.

But is it to remake a new brochure? Yes. Okay.

Which might look substantially similar to the one we have.

Okay.

I have a question. Yes. So the agenda item, as is the agenda item for the 430 meeting today, stands as is listed in the agenda. And this agenda, this motion is simply to direct Wendy to produce basically an earlier version. By the time the 430 meeting comes around, directing Wendy to produce an earlier version of the brochure, and then we will restart the discussions that we have.

The brochure was developed after a closed session that we had on August 4th that is disputed. So my motion is to have her lead us through the questions that we went through on August 4th, which I... Some of the things that wound up in this brochure, regardless of where they came from, include the timeline for the recruitment, the candidate profile, and the projects that we wanted to highlight for a future city administrator. So have her lead us through those discussions and create a brochure based on what's said tonight in public.

Yes.

But to answer your question, Jeff, yes, we're going to do item three on the orders of business tonight as it's written. We're just starting at an early point. which I'm sure Wendy can do. She started this process. She's managing the process, not us.

I have a question for the council. Do the four of you think that we can get through everything tonight that will lead to the recruitment starting? My concern has always been the schedule. And my concern here again is that this sounds like a step backwards. And it will impact the schedule in such a way that the approval of the contract will not happen until After Dale and I are not on the council. And I don't say that. I do not say that, you know, out of a sense of, you know, I'm in this seat, Dale's in this seat. I think we should be the people making the decisions. But what I don't want to have happen is for, again, is for us to go through a process and have the next council vote on the contract. It's really important to me that the people that are sitting in this chair when this contract comes up are the five of us. And if we don't have a commitment to do that, then we shouldn't go through this. That is a huge worry of mine.

Could I just say we're going to talk about the schedule? His motion says we're going to talk about the schedule at 4.30.

Well, his motion also says that we're going to discard the work product that we have produced during closed sessions. And I haven't agreed or disagreed that that work product is illegal or that we should or should not. I've not made any judgment on the work product. My concern is that by going back in the schedule whatever we have done in closed sessions, that will set us back by that process will exceed the amount of time that we have in the schedule.

I just want to short-circuit you for a second, which is I have a proposed schedule that I workshopped with Wendy that would start... that would have us be able to start the recruitment on Monday or Tuesday. It was originally Monday, but it's a great point about Labor Day. And then have us be able to have enough time in the process to achieve everything and wrap it up by the 12-8 meeting. Okay.

And I've just got to add that even if we are taking a step backwards, We have to because we have to restore the public trust that we're doing this correct. Because this letter, if they don't find that we've done something to correct what we're being accused of, they'll take it to the DA. This will be a lengthier process.

With respect, we have our attorney telling us that we haven't violated the law. And we have Mr. Kohler telling us we have violated the law. We had a whole hearing yesterday on ADU where we spent two hours listening to people tell us like the city constantly receives emails from people telling us that we have violated the law. Now, it's OK. It's OK to disagree. It's OK to disagree with the city attorney or with whatever. But I haven't said that I disagree with the city attorneys. So we may not be on the same page with respect to whether we have violated the law and whether we need to correct the supposed violations of the law. All I'm saying is that I don't agree. All I'm saying is without agreeing or not agreeing with the contents of Mr. Kohler's letter, that the one thing that I care about is finishing by the December 8th meeting. That's literally all I'm saying.

Let's make sure we run an efficient process on item three in orders of business tonight so we can get back to where we need to be in order to take the next step. And I think we can do that. Wendy's a professional. She's seen a lot in her experience running these processes. And I think... I think that the public, if they come prepared tonight and give us some good comments, I think we can have a discussion and get us back to where we need to be. And we'll see that in item three on orders of business. And that agenda starts at 430. So I think we've got a motion on the table. We have a second. Is that still good?

Yes, that's still good.

All right, let's do roll call.

Council Member Barron?

Yes.

Council Member Booter?

Yes.

Council Member Dramoff? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem Delves? Yes. Mayor Byrne?

Yes.

Motion carries.

Great. Thank you for that productive discussion. Appreciate everybody's perspective. All right. We've got a little bit of a break here, unless you have anything else to wrap that up?

No, there's nothing more to wrap up. You can adjourn until your 4.30 regular meeting.

Okay. We stand adjourned. We'll be back here at 4.30 for an interesting meeting.

Thank you, everybody.