Council’s Immigration Statement Removed From City Website, Will Be Revisited at Next Council Meeting

The City Council will revisit its controversial statement about immigration enforcement at their next public meeting after a local attorney alleged the original release may have violated California’s open-meetings law.

In a June 18 letter, City Attorney Michele Beal Bagneris said the statement, which was emailed to media on June 12 by mayoral aide Vannia De La Cuba, had been taken down from the City’s website and would be agendized for formal City Council discussion on June 23.

[See Pasadena Now’s June 13 report on the statement’s release]

The actions came in response to a June 13 complaint letter from attorney Michael Vogler, who asserted that the statement was crafted and approved through improper, nonpublic coordination among a quorum of councilmembers, which would be a violation of the Ralph M. Brown Act.

“Please be informed that the Statement has been removed from the City’s website,” Bagneris wrote to Vogler. “Further, pursuant to Section 54960.1(c)(2), this correspondence is to notify you that the City will agendize the Statement for City Council’s June 23, 2025, regular meeting.”

The Brown Act, adopted in 1953, requires that deliberations by local legislative bodies be conducted openly and publicly. The law prohibits council majorities from discussing city business outside of publicly noticed meetings, including via intermediaries or serial communications such as email chains.

Under Government Code Section 54960.1, a person who believes that a city council has violated the Brown Act may issue a written “cure and correct” demand of the alleged violation. The legislative body then has 30 days to either take remedial action or formally reject the claim.

Vogler, in his letter sent just before 4:30 p.m. on Friday, June 13, claimed that a city staffer, acting on behalf of council members, had violated the law by communicating with a majority of the seven-member Council in the drafting and approval of a joint statement concerning immigration enforcement. He also alleged that the approvals of at least two council members may have been falsely represented.

Bagneris’ letter did not address the factual accuracy of those claims but stated the City would take action consistent with the cure-and-correct provision.

Pasadena Now previously reported that Councilmember Gene Masuda declined to endorse the statement, making him the only member not listed as a signatory.

The upcoming June 23 meeting is expected to include a discussion of the statement and may allow Council members to formally approve, revise, or rescind it.

The Brown Act, named for Assemblymember Ralph M. Brown, emphasizes that public agencies exist to conduct the people’s business in public, and that secrecy undermines public trust. Violations of the law can result in nullified actions and, in rare cases, misdemeanor penalties.