From: Jason Devor <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2025 10:08:32 PM
To: City Council <[email protected]>
Subject: re: District 4 Appointment Process Review
Dear Mayor Tisdale and Members of the City Council,
I want to begin by acknowledging that filling a Council vacancy is never an easy process, and I respect the time and consideration each of you dedicated to making your decision. That said he procedure outlined in the staff report was not followed, creating procedural and lega concerns that should be addressed before the appointment is finalized.
The staff report presented to the public and to the Council clearly states:
"Mayor Tisdale will open nominations for the Council Member (District 4) position. Once all nominations are received, Mayor Tisdale will close nominations and request that the City Clerk conduct a roll-call vote. Each Council Mimat willote by majorily of te member pres. hand drings who receives an appointed to fill the vacancy."
This establishes a clear three-step process:
1. Open nominations to identify candidates.
2. Close nominations to finalize who will be considered.
3. Conduct a roll-call vote by the City Clerk to publicly record each member's vote and determine who received a majority.
Neither the closure of nominations nor the roll-call vote occurred. The Mayor never formally abstention of each Council Member be publicly reported.
Because nominations were never closed, the process never advanced to the lawful stage of voting and therefore did not meet the procedural requirements under California Government Code §36512, which governs how council vacancies are filled. This omission means that no valid appointment was made under the noticed procedure.
It was also evident that there was confusion on the dais regarding how to proceed, which highlights that the process, as published, was not properly followed. Even if the same result were to occur after correction, it's essential that the record reflect a lawful, transparent, and properly conducted action consistent with both state law and the City's published procedure.
Additionally, I was disappointed in my recent interaction with City Attorney Mann when I raised this concern. When I asked him to review the language of the staff report, his response was, "I don't need to. " I replied, "Well, you should," and he said, "Well, I'm not. " For the City's legal representative to refuse to verify the published process is deeply concerning, especially given his responsibility to ensure compliance with law and council procedure.
Accordingly, I respectfully request that the Council review or re-agendize this item for clarification and a proper roll-call vote before the scheduled swearing-in. Doing so would align the City's actions with California Government Code §§36512 and 54953, ensuring transparency, accountability, and legal validity of the appointment.
Should this issue remain unaddressed, please consider this message to serve as a formal Brown Act "cure and correct" demand under Gov. Code §54960.1, requesting that the Council cure the action within the statutory period. This request is not a challenge to the individual selected but rather to ensure that the City's process fully complies with law and its publicly noticed procedure.
If I have misunderstood the process and the decision stands as valid, I want to be clear that I am excited to have such a passionate individual as Michael Carroll representing District 4. My only goal is to ensure that the City's actions are consistent with both the law and the public process that was presented.
Respectfully,
Jason Devor