1 Vernice Hankins
From: Clerk Mailbox
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2022 2:28 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: FW: Agenda Packet - Mar 25, 2022 (Fri) - City Council From: Stanley H Epstein <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2022 10:24 AM
To: David White <[email protected]>; Joseph Lawrence <[email protected]>; Clerk Mailbox <[email protected]>; Alan Seltzer <[email protected]> Cc: Sue Himmelrich <[email protected]>; Phil Brock <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Oscar de la Torre <[email protected]>; Christine Parra <[email protected]>; Gleam Davis <[email protected]>; Lana Negrete <[email protected]>
Subject: Fwd: Agenda Packet ‐ Mar 25, 2022 (Fri) ‐ City Council
EXTERNAL
I understand Council does not intend to have a substantive discussion tomorrow of the existing Council Rules, or possible changes thereto. However, a quick look reveals enormous problems with part of Rule 5 (g), and particularly the right of the City to exclude written comments that are “ potentially slanderous or libelous”. That could exclude about 90% of submitted comments. We all know that defamation requires basically two elements. One is an untrue statement of fact about an individual or entity and the second is damage. There is no need to consult Webster for the extremely broad definition of “ potentially”. So all that is needed to exclude is the even remote possibility that a communication refers to a person or entity that might be damaged if the statement is untrue. Is the City Clerk supposed to research for truthfulness and possible damage elements every fact contained in every submission? Of course not! Let us start thinking Friday about better and workable language for this basis of exclusion. I would also ask Joe to opine whether the City would be liable if defamatory comments were inserted in Written Communications. Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619
Sent from my iPad
Begin forwarded message:
From: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Date: March 24, 2022 at 8:34:07 AM PDT
Subject: Agenda Packet ‐ Mar 25, 2022 (Fri) ‐ City Council Reply‐To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
The agenda packet has been revised to include attachment A to item 4.A.
Please see the attached Agenda Packet document for the following meeting:
Item 4.A
03/25/21
1 of 2 Item 4.A
03/25/21
2 City Council
Special Meeting
Friday, March 25, 2022 9:00 AM
Assembly Bill No. 361 Signed By ‐ Governor Gavin Newsom, __, __ __ Download PDF Agenda Packet | View Web Agenda Packet
Document Modified: 3/24/2022 8:33 AM
If you no longer wish to be included in this distribution list you can remove yourself through the meeting web portal or reply to this message.
Item 4.A
03/25/21
2 of 2 Item 4.A
03/25/21