City Council:
Ron Wellander, Mayor
Sandra Lowe, Vice Mayor
Jack Ding
Patricia Farrar-Rivas
John Gurney
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA
OF THE SONOMA CITY COUNCIL
City Council Chambers, 177 First Street West
Wednesday, August 12, 2026
9:00 AM
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/86101955455
Be Courteous - TURN OFF your cell phones and watches while the meeting is in session.
NOTICE: The Mayor has called the City Council into a Special Meeting to discuss only the matters stated on the agenda listed below.
PUBLIC COMMENT AT SPECIAL MEETING: Members of the public shall have the opportunity to address the City Council concerning any item listed on the agenda during consideration of that item, when the Mayor opens public comment. No other items may be discussed at this special meeting.
Page
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION
2.1: Possible Receipt of Presentations and Question & Answer Session with UC Berkeley Haas School of Business Executive MBA Students Regarding Innovation, Challenges, and Opportunities in Sonoma (Cristine Alilovich, Interim City Manager) RECOMMENDATION: This session provides an opportunity for students to present their projects and ask questions about how a small city runs, and the challenges and opportunities.
2.2: Consider and Possibly Take Action to Approve an Unconditional Commitment Letter to Laurie Alderman Responding to her Brown Act and ADA Violation Claims Set Forth in Her Letter of July 16, 2026
RECOMMENDATION: Council discretion.
Agenda Report - Unconditional Commitment Letter - Pdf
2 - 10
3. ADJOURNMENT
I do hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on the City Hall bulletin board as legally required. Rebekah Barr, MMC, City Clerk.
*********************************************************************************************************************************** Copies of all staff reports and documents subject to disclosure that relate to any item of business referred to on the agenda are normally available for public inspection the Wednesday before each regularly scheduled meeting at City Hall, located at No. 1 The Plaza, Sonoma CA. Any documents subject to disclosure that are provided to all, or a majority of all, of the members of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda after the agenda has been distributed will be made available for inspection at the City Clerk’s office, No. 1 The Plaza, Sonoma CA during regular business hours.
If you challenge the action of the City Council in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described on the agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk, at or prior to the public hearing.
In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk (707) 933-2216. Notification 48-hours before the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting.
NOTE: Portions of this document may have been drafted with support from AI-based tools, consistent with City of Sonoma policy on use of artificial intelligence. All information represented in this document has been reviewed by City of Sonoma staff.
City of Sonoma
Agenda Item Summary
Meeting: Special City Council - 12 Aug
2026
Department
Legal
Staff Contact
David J. Ruderman, City Attorney
Rebekah Barr, MMC, City Clerk
Agenda Item Title
Consider and Possibly Take Action to Approve an Unconditional Commitment Letter to Laurie Alderman Responding to her Brown Act and ADA Violation Claims Set Forth in Her Letter of July 16, 2026
Summary
By letter dated July 16, 2026, Laurie Alderman sent the City a cease and desist letter claiming that, during the July 15, 2026, regular City Council meeting, the City violated the Brown Act and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) as follows: (1) the City did not properly notice its closed session(s); (2) the City did not properly allow for comment on all items on the agenda; and (3) the City violated the ADA by not allowing Ms. Alderman to comment via Zoom.
Ms. Alderman’s letter appears to be a cease and desist letter pursuant to Government Code section 54960.2. This section of the Brown Act permits any interested person to file a lawsuit to determine the applicability of the Brown Act to "past actions" of the City Council. Before such a lawsuit can be filed, the person must submit a cease and desist letter to the City Council clearly describing the "past action" of the City Council and demanding that it issue a letter agreeing to unconditionally commit to ceasing and desisting from engaging in that "past action" in the future. If the City Council issues such an unconditional commitment, no lawsuit may be commenced to determine the applicability of the Brown Act to the past action subject to the unconditional commitment. The fact that a council provides an unconditional commitment "shall not be construed or admissible as evidence of a violation" of the Brown Act.
Recommended Council Action
Approve a letter unconditionally committing to ceasing and desisting from the alleged and challenged actions that would violate the Brown Act or ADA regarding noticing special meetings, allowing public comment, and providing reasonable accommodations to the public at meetings.
Alternative Actions
Do not approve the attached unconditional commitment letter.
Financial Impact
Depending on whether or not litigation is brought against the City resulting from the City Council's action pertinent to this agenda item, the City may or may not incur additional future costs, the amount of which is too uncertain to make any meaningful prediction of same at the present time.
Agenda Item #2.2:
Environmental Review Status
Environmental Impact Report
Negative Declaration
Exempt
Not Applicable
Approved/Certified
No Action Required
Action Requested
Attachments
Ms. Alderman’s July 16, 2026 Cease and Desist Letter
Unconditional Commitment Letter
Agenda Item #2.2:
NOTICE OF CEASE AND DESIST: VIOLATIONS OF THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT AND TITLE
II OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
TO: The City Council of the City of Sonoma, City Attorney, and City Manager FROM: Laurie Alderman, 707-795-1540
DATE: July 16, 2026
Dear City Council and City Staff,
This letter serves as a formal Notice to Cease and Desist from ongoing, systemic violations of both the Ralph M. Brown Act (Cal. Gov. Code § 54950 et seq.) and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (42 U.S.C. § 12131 et seq.) during your regularly scheduled public council meetings.
As a certified homebound, wheelchair-reliant resident of Sonoma County, I have an absolute statutory and constitutional right to monitor and publicly participate in municipal governance. The City of Sonoma is currently failing to maintain a legally compliant framework, exposing the municipality to severe state and federal civil rights litigation.
1. DEMAND UNDER THE BROWN ACT (Gov. Code §§ 54954.2, 54960.1) The City has continuously failed to ensure that its public comment and meeting broadcast mechanisms function in a manner that allows uninterrupted public oversight and speech. Furthermore, notice is hereby given that the City must immediately cease and desist from adding, convening, or entering into closed sessions without proper, lawful notice to the public. Under Government Code § 54954.2, all items to be discussed in a closed session must be explicitly described on a publicly posted agenda at least 72 hours in advance. The City Council may not circumvent the public’s right to open governance by conducting unagendized, unnotified closed-door meetings.
2. DEMAND FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO TESTIFY ON INDIVIDUAL AGENDA ITEMS (Gov. Code § 54954.3)
Notice is hereby given that the City must immediately cease and desist from restricting, lumping together, or denying the public’s absolute right to offer separate public comment on each and every individual agenda item brought before the council. Under Government Code § 54954.3, members of the public must be permitted to directly address the legislative body on any specific agenda item before or during the City Council’s discussion or vote on that item. The City cannot truncate public participation by forcing a single, generalized comment Agenda Item #2.2:
window that covers multiple distinct pieces of municipal business, as doing so constitutes a fatal procedural violation of the Brown Act.
3. DEMAND UNDER TITLE II OF THE ADA (28 C.F.R. § 35.130) Under Title II of the ADA, the City of Sonoma is legally required to provide equal access to its programs, services, and activities, including City Council meetings. By failing to provide a reliable, accessible, and functioning remote accommodation (such as a verified call-in queue or Zoom audio bridge) for disabled individuals who are physically unable to attend in person, the City is actively engaging in structural disability discrimination
SPECIFIC INSTANCE OF NON-ACCOMMODATION: JULY 15, 2026
This systemic failure directly resulted in a violation of my civil rights during the regularly scheduled City of Sonoma Council Meeting on July 15, 2026. As a certified homebound citizen, I attempted to access and participate in the meeting remotely. However, due to the City’s complete lack of an established, operational ADA accommodation policy—and a failure to maintain working remote public comment infrastructure—I was entirely excluded from testifying. The City failed to provide any alternative, accessible protocol, leaving me with zero accommodation during a live public hearing. Under federal law, conducting a public meeting while actively locking out a disabled resident due to policy absence constitutes explicit, actionable discrimination.
REMEDIAL ACTIONS REQUIRED TO AVOID LITIGATION
To remedy these simultaneous violations and avoid formal legal action in both state and federal courts, the City of Sonoma must immediately implement the following protocols:
1. Mandatory ADA Accommodations: Establish a permanent, dedicated, and fully tested remote telephonic/video public comment procedure specifically designated for individuals with documented mobility disabilities.
2. Brown Act Protocol Corrections: Ensure that if a technical failure disconnects the remote public comment system, the City Council will pause the meeting immediately until public access is fully restored, as required by California law.
3. Written Confirmation: Provide a written response to this notice within fourteen (14) business days outlining the specific technical and policy changes the city will execute.
4. Establish an Explicit Municipal ADA Meeting Policy: Formally draft, pass, and publish a comprehensive municipal policy detailing the exact steps the City of Sonoma will take to ensure remote meeting access and public comment Agenda Item #2.2:
capabilities for disabled residents, preventing a recurrence of the exclusion that took place on July 15, 2026.
If the City fails to cure these dynamic violations, I will utilize all available legal avenues, including filing a formal civil rights complaint with the U.S. Department of Justice and seeking a mandate in California Superior Court. I look forward to your prompt compliance.
Sincerely,
Laurie Alderman
Resident of Cotati.
dated: 7/16/2026
Agenda Item #2.2:
1 To Ms. Alderman:
The City Council of the City of Sonoma has received your cease and desist letter dated July 16, 2026 alleging that the following described past actions of the legislative body violates the Ralph M. Brown Act (“Brown Act”):
1. DEMAND UNDER THE BROWN ACT (Gov. Code §§ 54954.2, 54960.1).
The City has continuously failed to ensure that its public comment and meeting broadcast mechanisms function in a manner that allows uninterrupted public oversight and speech. Furthermore, notice is hereby given that the City must immediately cease and desist from adding, convening, or entering into closed sessions without proper, lawful notice to the public. Under Government Code § 54954.2, all items to be discussed in a closed session must be explicitly described on a publicly posted agenda at least 72 hours in advance. The City Council may not circumvent the public’s right to open governance by conducting unagendized, unnotified closed-door meetings.
2. DEMAND FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO TESTIFY ON
INDIVIDUAL AGENDA ITEMS (Gov. Code § 54954.3). Notice is hereby given that the City must immediately cease and desist from restricting, lumping together, or denying the public’s absolute right to offer separate public comment on each and every individual agenda item brought before the council. Under Government Code § 54954.3, members of the public must be permitted to directly address the legislative body on any specific agenda item before or during the City Council’s discussion or vote on that item. The City cannot truncate public participation by forcing a single, generalized comment window that covers multiple distinct pieces of municipal business, as doing so constitutes a fatal procedural violation of the Brown Act.
3. DEMAND UNDER TITLE II OF THE ADA (28 C.F.R. § 35.130). Under Title II of the ADA, the City of Sonoma is legally required to provide equal access to its programs, services, and activities, including City Council meetings. By failing to provide a reliable, accessible, and functioning remote accommodation (such as a verified call-in queue or Zoom audio bridge) for disabled individuals who are physically unable to attend in person, the City is actively engaging in structural disability discrimination.
Agenda Item #2.2:
2 In order to avoid unnecessary litigation and without admitting any violation of the Ralph M. Brown Act or ADA, the Sonoma City Council hereby unconditionally commits that it will cease, desist from, and not repeat the following challenged and alleged actions: (1) failure to properly notice closed session meetings, (2) failure to provide an opportunity for public comment, and (3) failure to provide reasonable accommodations under the ADA.
The Sonoma City Council may rescind this commitment only by a majority vote of its membership taken in open session at a regular meeting and noticed on its posted agenda as “Rescission of Brown Act Commitment.” You will be provided with written notice, sent by any means or media you provide in response to this message, to whatever address or addresses you specify, of any intention to consider rescinding this commitment at least 30 days before any such regular meeting. In the event that this commitment is rescinded, you will have the right to commence legal action pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 54960 of the Government Code. That notice will be delivered to you by the same means as this commitment, or may be mailed to an address that you have designated in writing.
Regarding your first demand, please note that the City may agendize separate meetings, including special meetings, to address specific matters on 24 hours’ notice. (Gov. Code, § 54956.) The July 15, 2026, special closed session meetings were properly noticed by the City on July 9, in excess of the 24 hour notice required. (Proof of publication attached.) The public was allowed to comment prior to the Council adjourning to closed at each of that days’ two special meetings. At the conclusion of the closed sessions, the Council reported out under Government Code section 54957.7. The City’s closed session agenda provides additional clarity when time constraints impact the report out, stating:
If action is taken during a Closed Session meeting and is required to be reported the Council will return to Open Session and report out immediately. However, if they are unable to do so due to time constraints, they will report out at the immediately following Regular Council Meeting under "REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION".
Regarding your second demand, the City provides the public an opportunity to provide general public comment at regular meetings and to provide specific public comment on each item that seeks Council consideration, action or direction under Government Code section 54954.3. Items not before the City for consideration do not trigger the public comment requirement. (See, e.g., Coalition of Labor, Agriculture & Business v. County of Santa Barbara Bd. of Supervisors (2005) 129 Cal.App.4th 205, 209 [finding no public comment was required when agency decided on matters to include on agenda].) At the Agenda Item #2.2:
3 City Council’s July 15, 2026 regular meeting, no member of the public was denied the opportunity to speak during general public comment or on the specific items agendized for Council action.
Finally, you claim the City failed to provide you with an “alternative, accessible protocol” for public comment. However, before the July 15th Council meeting, the City Clerk informed you by email that it would provide you with reasonable accommodations through various means of submitting public comment, of which you have subsequently availed yourself; the Clerk informed you:
The City of Sonoma does not currently allow public comment via Zoom during its public meetings. In addition, because of the City's population, it is not subject to the remote participation requirements established under SB 707. While the City does not currently have a policy providing for remote public participation as an ADA accommodation, it will be reviewing this matter and working on preparing a draft policy for consideration regarding requests for remote participation as a disability accommodation in the near future.
Accordingly, we are unable to accommodate your request to provide live public comment remotely via Zoom for tonight's meeting.
We are, however, happy to ensure your comments are made part of the public record. You may submit your comments in writing before the meeting, and they will be distributed to the City Council and included in the record. Alternatively, if you prefer, you may submit an audio recording in advance, and the City will either play the recording or read your comments into the record during the meeting. We will also honor your request for additional time by allowing your written comments or audio recording to exceed the standard public comment time limit.
As the Clerk also explained, the City will prepare a draft ADA accommodation policy for public comment which it intends to review and possibly adopt in the coming months.
Very truly yours,
______________________________
Ron Wellander
Mayor, City of Sonoma
Agenda Item #2.2:
Agenda Item #2.2: