CC 01-12-2024 Item No. 1 City Council Training_Written CommunicationsCC 1-12-2024
Item No. 1
City Council Training
Written Communications
ROSENBERG’S RULES OF ORDER
CHEAT SHEET
To: You say: Interrupt
Speaker
Second
Needed
Debatable Amendable Vote
Needed
Adjourn "I move that we adjourn"
(Only needed prior to the end of the agenda)
No Yes No No Majority
Recess "I move that we recess until…" No Yes No Yes Majority
Complain about noise,
room temp., etc.
"Point of privilege" Yes No No No Chair
Decides
Suspend further
consideration of
something
"I move that we table it" No Yes No No Majority
End debate "I move the previous question" or “Call the question” No Yes No No 2/3
Postpone
consideration of
something
"I move we postpone this matter until…" No Yes Yes Yes Majority
Introduce a motion “I move that…” or “I move to…” No Yes Yes Yes Majority
Amend a motion "I move that this motion be amended by…" (You
can also ask for a friendly amendment, which is
less formal; if mover and second concur, no vote
needed)
No Yes Yes Yes Majority
Refer to a Committee “I move that the question be referred to a
committee for more study”
No Yes Yes Yes Majority
The above listed motions and points are listed in established order of precedence. When any one of them is pending, you may not introduce another
that is listed below, but you may introduce another that is listed above it.
To: You say: Interrupt
Speaker
Second
Needed
Debatable Amendable Vote Needed
Object to procedure
or personal affront
"Point of order" Yes No No No Chair decides
Request information "Point of information" Yes No No No None
Object to considering
some undiplomatic or
improper matter
"I object to consideration of this question"
(This would generally just be used if something is
not on the agenda)
Yes No No No 2/3
Reconsider
something already
disposed of
"I move we now (or later) reconsider our action
relative to…" (Only a member of the prevailing
side can make a motion to reconsider)
Yes Yes Only if
original
motion
was
debatabl
e
No Majority
Vote on a ruling by the Chair "I appeal the Chair’s decision" Yes Yes Yes No Majority
The motions, points and proposals listed above have no established order of preference; any of them may be introduced at any time except when
meeting is considering one of the top three matters listed from the first chart (Motion to Adjourn, Recess or Point of Privilege).
C(, 1 Isr}zy ' )
January 12, 2024
To: City of Cupertino, City Council and Staff
From: Cathy Helgerson - 408-253-0490
Regarding: Special Meeting - 1/12/24 at 11:00 in the Cupertino Library Rm 201 - also other comments
and informaUon listed on this paperwork.
Special Meeting Subject: City Council Training
A- Cupertino City Council Procedures Manual Procedures
B- Rosenberg"s Rules of Order
Cathy Helgerson-l would like to add comme'nts and information regarding reference to meetings that
have been conducted in the past. The meetings taking place behind closed door and special meeting be
looked at in order to comply with the laws of the State of California.
Special Meeting on 11/20/23 5:30 listed as a closed session meeting which was not disclosed as a
continuation pertaining subject matter titled: Conference with Legal Council existing litigation pursuant
to Government Code 54956.9 (City of Cupertino v. California Department of Tax Fee Administration.
This meeting was a continuation of a prior meeting and may also have other meetings in the future on
this subject. It was not listed as a continuation of prior meetings. I believe 3 such meetings have been
conducted on the same subject. These meetings provided not reports to the public and this is a violation
to the Brown Act and the California Government Codes.
It is stated in the codes (4) which states based on existing facts and circumstance, the legislature body of
the local agency has decided to initiate or is deciding whether to initiate litigation. The City of Cupertino
has not made public what has been taking place and needs tO make public to the citizens of Cupertino
information pertaining to the subject listed above. Has this matter gone into a formal litigation with the
California Department of Tax and Fee Administration and what is the results. This information must be
provided to the public.
Question: has the City of Cupertino filed a petition for redetermination with California Department of Tax
Fee Administration? Have they decided on a settlement and offer in the Compromise Program under
appeals page 28 bub 30602021-22 this is listed under their Annual Report?
Government Code - 5495.6.75 Audit by the State Auditor's Office; Closed Meeting to discuss response
(a) Nothing contained in the chapters shall be construed to prevent the legislative body of a local
agency that has received a confidential final draft audit report from the Bureau of State Audits
from holding closed sessions to discuss its response to the report.
(b) After the public release of an audit report by the Bureau of State Audits, if a legislative body of a
local agency meets to discuss he audit report, it shall do so in an open session unless exempted
from that requirement by some other provision of law.
Permissible Closed Sessions Item (4) Once the closed session has been completed the agency must
reconvene in open session, where it may be required to report votes and actions taken in closed session.
Gov code 54957.1 and 54957 (b) Public Reporting Action Taken in Closed Session- The Brown Act
requires local governing body to publicly report certain actions taken in closed sessions that are of a final
nature, and the vote or abstention of each member present. (see Gov Code 54957.1) reports that are
required to be made pursuant to this section may be made orally or in writing. There is a chart that can
be accessed on the web which describes the types of action that must be taken publicly reported when
the report must be made, and the information that must be reported. Please read the complete Brown
Act in order to completely understand it purpose.
Under Notice and Agenda Requirement Item D closed sessions require 4. Adjournments and continuance
need not be separately posted if subsequent meeting is continued no more than FIVE DAYS. HOWEVER,
NOTICE OF ADJOURNMENT (CONTINUANCE) MUST BE POSTED.
Cathy Helgerson - comment - This meeting on 11/20/23 Special Meeting at 5:30 closed session was not
disclosed as a continuation of prior meetings. It should be noted that 5 days is the limit of meeting to be
conducted. If there are to be more meeting there needs to be a mention of a continuation. Once a
subject has been fully discussed a full report shall be provided to the public and listed on the agenda.
The Brown Act (Government Code section 54950, et seq.) states The Brown Act embodies the philosophy
that public agencies exist for the purpose of conducting public business, and the public has the right to
know how its "collaborative decision" are being made. The reporting after a closed session should be
made before the public and the reports and information made public.
Chapter 9 - Meetings. Section 54950, In enacting the chapter the legislature finds and declares that the
public commissions, boards, and councils and the other public agencies in this state exist to aid in the
conduct of the people's business. It is the intent of the law that their actions be taken j and that
their deliberations be conducted OPENLY.
The people of the state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which service them. The people, in
delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to
know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may
retain control over the instruments they have created. WE THE PEOPLE OF CUPERTINO REQUIRE
TRANSPARACY!
The City of Cupertino, Staff and Legal Department are in violation of the Brown Act and California
Government Code 54950 - 54963. The City Council must act on the bases of those who elected them to
office in a timely manner and must regard city business as a serious obligation.
Cathy Helgerson - Comment - Question - Why is the City Council holding this Special Meeting at the
Cupertino Library on 1/12/24 at 11:00 AM Friday? I understand there is no televised taping of the
meeting this is something that is very wrong. This information - Cupertino City Council Procedures
Manual Procedures and the Rosenberg's Rules of order are of great interest to the public and the public
should be witness to the issues that pertain to this information.
It is also disturbing to me about that the city cancelled the 1/2/24, 1/16/24 City Council meetings and
now is holding this special meeting 1/22/24 at 11:00 Am in room 201. There is also a Budget Meeting
scheduled on 1/17/24. How can a budget meeting be scheduled if the problems with the California
Department of Tax and Fee Administration have not been settled and resolved? The public is worried
and I am worried about what things the city will decide on and is sacrificing in order to pay money back
to the CDTFA. I understand that open jobs will not be replaced and people have left the city probably due
to the ISSUES and problems. Programs are on the chopping block and this is unacceptable. Jobs are on
the line here and is seems that the public is forced to just wait to see what is in the budget.
Note: This is from the Brown Act Compliance Manual page 26. The District Attorney or any interested
person may file a civil action against the City of Cupertino reference Remedies and Penalties for
Violations - Criminal topics - Criminal penalties, Civil action to prevent future violations and Opportunity
for legislative body to cure and correct alleged violations.
Cathy Helgerson - Comment - Finally the City of Cupertino, City Council, staff and legal council must
understand that WE THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DESIRE AND DISEARVE TO BE HEARD ON
ALL LEVELS. We ask that the information requested be provided to the people of Cupertino right away in
order for justice to be served. There needs to be complete cooperation and transparency. I have
commented on many ISSUES and have been ignored and so have many other citizens of Cupertino this
needs to end.
7, -kl-e
Remedies and Penalties for Violations
Criminal penalties.
A member of a legislative body may be charged with a misdemeanor where
(a) the member attends a meeting where an action is taken in violation
of the Brown Act, and (b) the member intends to deprive the public of
information to which the public is entitled under the Brown Act.9o
Note: If the challenged meeting involves only deliberation and no action
is taken, there can be no misdemeanor penalty. IVloreover, as with most
sriminal statutes, it is often difficult to prove criminal intent. As a result,
criminal enforcement of the Brown Act is rare.
Civil action to prevent future violations.
The district attorney or any interested person may file a civil action to:
* Stop or prevent a threatened violation of the Brown Act.9'
* Determine the applicability of the Brown Act to ongoing actions or
threatened future action of the legislative body.92
* Determine whether any rule or action by the legislative body to
penalize or otherwise discourage the expression of one or more of
its members is valid under state or federal law.g"
Compel the legislative body to tape record its closed sessions.94
Determine that an action of a Legislative Body violated the Brown
Act and the action is null and void.95
Opportunity for the legislative body to cure and correct
alleged violations."
Before filing a legal action alleging that a legislative body violated the Brown
Act, the complaining party must send a written "cure or correct" demand to
the legislative body. The demand must clearly describe the challenged action,
the nature of the alleged violation, and the "cure" sought, and must be sent
within 90 days of the alleged violation (or 30 days if the action was taken in
open session but in violation of S 54952.2, which defines "meetings").The
legislative body has up to 30 days to cure and correct its action. If it does
not act, any lawsuit must be commenced within '15 days after (a) receipt
of written notice from the legislative body of such non-action, or (b) the
expiration of the 30-day cure period if the legislative body does not respond
to the cure request.