1 * Time is approximate. Closed Session shall begin upon conclusion of the Study Session.
B0785-0001\3143638v1.doc
CITY OF BEVERLY HILLS
City Hall
City Council Chamber and Room 280B
455 North Rexford Drive
Beverly Hills, CA 90210
Public Comment Participation:
In-person in City Council Chamber
or by calling (310) 288-2288
or by email at [email protected]
SPECIAL CLOSED SESSION AGENDA
August 19, 2025
1:30 p.m.
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL
The City Council finds, based on advice from legal counsel, that discussion in open session will prejudice the position of the local agency in the litigation.
Anticipation of Litigation
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2) and (d)(3).
Number of Cases: 2
1. The City has received a claim for damages from a former employee. Documentation of the claim is available in the City Clerk’s office.
2. The City has received a written threat of litigation concerning a proposed development project at 145 S. Rodeo Drive. Documentation of the threat is available in the City Clerk’s office.
Existing Litigation
Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)
Name of Case:
1. DuPont Clinic, PC, et al. v. City of Beverly Hills, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 23STCV24271, and related cases including DuPont Clinic, PC v. DE BHMC, LLC 23STCV19298, 24STCV28644, 25STCV11915
This litigation concerns allegations related to an alleged interference with a lease.
2. Ian Greene, et al. v. City of Beverly Hills, et al., United States District Court Case No. 24-cv-05916-MRA-AS
2 B0785-0001\3143638v1.doc
This litigation concerns an allegation of racial profiling by the Beverly Hills Police Department.
3. Californians For Homeownership, Inc. v. City of Beverly Hills, Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 24STCP02082
This litigation concerns a challenge to the City’s determination that the application for 125-129 S. Linden drive was incomplete.
4. 9300 Wilshire, LLC v. City of Beverly Hills, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 24STCP02964
This litigation concerns a challenge to the City’s determination that the application for 125-129 S. Linden drive was incomplete.
5. 8800 Wilshire Associates, LP v. City of Beverly Hills, et al.; Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 25 STCP01129
This litigation concerns a challenge to the City’s determination that the Builder’s Remedy development application for this property was lost due to a change to the square footage.
6. 8820 Wilshire Associates, LP v. City of Beverly Hills, et al.; Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. STCP01131
This litigation concerns a challenge to the City’s determination that the Builder’s Remedy development application for this property was lost due to a change to the square footage.
7. California Housing Defense Fund, et al., v. City of Beverly Hills; Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 25STCP01665
This litigation concerns a challenge to the City’s determination that the Builder’s Remedy development application for the property at 8800 Wilshire Boulevard, Beverly Hills was lost due to a change to the square footage.
8. California Housing Defense Fund, et al., v. City of Beverly Hills; Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 25STCP00260
This litigation concerns a challenge to the City’s determination that the Builder’s Remedy development application for the property at 8820 Wilshire Boulevard, Beverly Hills was lost due to a change to the square footage.
9. Californians for Homeownership, Inc., et al. v. City of Beverly Hills, Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 25STCP02017
This litigation concerns a challenge to the City’s determination that the Builder’s Remedy development application for the property at 140 S. Camden Drive, Beverly Hills was lost. 3 B0785-0001\3143638v1.doc
10. Wilshire Camden LLC v. City of Beverly Hills, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 25STCP02058
This litigation concerns a challenge to the City’s determination that the Builder’s Remedy development application for the property at 140 S. Camden Drive, Beverly Hills was lost.
11. Djavid Hakakian, et al. v. City of Beverly Hills, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 22STCV35220
This litigation concerns an automobile accident with a City police vehicle.
12. September Sarno v. David E. Naghi, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 23SMCV05185
This litigation concerns personal injury and property damage caused by a falling tree.
13. Fred Cohan, et al. v. City of Beverly Hills, Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 24SMCV00636
This litigation concerns property damage caused by a falling tree.
14. Russell Stuart v. City of Beverly Hills, Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 25SMCV04079
This litigation concerns a vehicle versus pedestrian accident.
15. Daryl Glover v. City of Beverly Hills, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 23STCV04166
This litigation concerns an allegation of discrimination, harassment and retaliation by a former employee.
CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR
Government Code Section 54957.6
CITY NEGOTIATOR: Peter J. Brown, Special Counsel
Employee Organization: Police Officers Association (POA) The most recent Memorandum of Understanding with the Police Officers Association was adopted May 24, 2022.
CITY NEGOTIATOR: Peter J. Brown, Special Counsel
Employee Organization: Fire Association
The most recent Memorandum of Understanding with the Fire Association was adopted October 1, 2019.
4 B0785-0001\3143638v1.doc
CITY NEGOTIATOR: Sharona R. Nazarian, PsyD., Mayor
Unrepresented Employee: City Manager
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT
Government Code Section 54957
Title: City Manager