Petition 16 - Communications During Executive Sessions Convened for Legal Advice.pdf

-ITIZEN
PETITION
pursuant to Phoenix City Charter, Chapter IV, Sec. 22, requests the City Council to:
ADOPT AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE
PHOENIX CITY CODE REGARDING
COMMUNICATIONS DURING EXECUTIVE
SESSIONS CONVENED FOR LEGAL ADVICE
Submitted by:
Jerry Van Gasse
4610 E Via Estrella
Phoenix, AZ 85028
(602) 622-3515
board@goodgoat. net

CONTENTS
Summary
Request for Council Action
Proposed Measure
fi exact measure the

SUMMARY
The Problem
State law allows the Council to close a meeting to the public only for listed purposes.
* Paragraph (A)(3) is “discussion or consultation for legal advice” with the City’s
attorneys.
* Adifferent paragraph, (A)(4), lets the Council “consider its position and instruct
its attorneys,” and only on contracts, litigation and settlement.
* Collective decisions must be made in public.
Phoenix cites paragraph (A)(3) alone for many executive-session items. They
include items whose titles refer to ordinances, City policies and programs, such as
camping enforcement, heat safety, middle housing, park rules and immigration
policies (Fact 6). For every one of those items, the only thing standing between legal
advice and closed-door deliberation by the Council is each participant’s
understanding in the moment, out of public view.
No published Phoenix rule, guideline or training material was located that says
where legal advice ends and discussion among Councilmembers begins. The
Council’s rules of proceedings, City Code § 2-60, contain no rule about executive
sessions at all (Fact 7).
What the Proposed Measure Does
Adopt an ordinance adding a new section to Chapter 2 of the Phoenix City Code that, in
any executive session for which legal advice under A.R.S. § 38-431.03(A)(3) is the only
asserted authority, limits substantive communication to legal advice between Council
members and the City’s attorneys, bars member-to-member deliberation on the matter,
and requires the presiding officer to stop any communication that goes beyond those
limits.
Why the Council Should Adopt It
it draws a clear line in the Council's own rules.
Paragraph (A)(3) is about legal advice from the City’s attorneys. Considering the Council's
position and instructing attorneys is a separate paragraph, (A)(4), limited to contracts,
litigation and settlement (Facts 1-2). Member-to-member deliberation about what the
Council should do belongs in public session, or in a session noticed under a paragraph that
Citizen Petition JV-20261021-09 - Presented by Jerry Van Gasse for GOOD/GOAT goodgeat net Page 3 of 9

SUMMARY
authorizes it. The ordinance writes that line into the Council’s own Code, in plain terms, for
every session in which (A)(3) is the only authority cited.
» It gives members a clear rule in advance.
In a suit brought by the Attorney General, a court may impose a civil penalty on an
individual member who knowingly violates the Open Meeting Law, and the City may not
pay it for the member (Fact 9). A clear local rule tells each member, before the doors close,
what is and is not permitted in an (A)(3) session, and gives every member a ready answer
when a discussion drifts.
it keeps legal advice fully available.
The ordinance does not limit requesting, giving, receiving or clarifying legal advice: it
expressly permits all four. It keeps the following available:
* objections and points of order:
* conflict announcements;
° safety communications;
* requests to return to public session:
* every other statutory ground for an executive session, provided that ground’s own
notice and authorization requirements are met.
lt assigns responsibility in the room.
The Council's rules already make the presiding officer responsible for enforcing them (Fact
8). The ordinance applies that responsibility to (A)(3) sessions: when communication
exceeds the limits, the presiding officer stops it.
it is a local choice the Council can make on its own.
The ordinance sets a standard for Phoenix's own proceedings, as the Council has done
many times by ordinance (Fact 10). It does not depend on any court ruling.
The Facts
1. Arizona law permits a public body to hold an executive session “only for” the purposes it
lists. Paragraph (A)(3) is “Discussion or consultation for legal advice with the attorney or
attorneys of the public body.”
2. Aseparate paragraph, (A)(4), permits discussion or consultation with the body's attorneys “in
order to consider its position and instruct its attorneys.” It applies only to:
* contracts that are the subject of negotiations:
* pending or contemplated litigation;
* settlement discussions.
3. Two limits apply in every executive session:
( y Van Gasse for GOODIGOAT - geadgaat net Page 4 of 9

SUMMARY
* Legal action involving a final vote or decision may not be taken in an executive
session, except that the body may instruct its attorneys or representatives as provided
in paragraphs (A)(4), (5) and (7).
* A public body may not discuss in executive session any matter not described in the
notice of the session, except as provided in § 38-431.02(I) and (J).
Sourte: OA RA ARS. me § C°2RO 38-431.03(D), AE MTV), (BE) (TS
4. “Legal action” means “a collective decision, commitment or promise” made by a public body,
and all legal action of public bodies must occur during a public meeting.
o> SOE i fh BIR Ss Q4/ aA , 28.424 4° HAA
5. Phoenix's executive-session notices state that the session is “authorized by A.R.S.
§38-431.03, A.1 through A.7,” and then cite, for each agenda item, the specific paragraph or
paragraphs relied on.
on, Mar. 3, 2025 and
6. Phoenix notices cite paragraph (A)(3) alone for items whose titles refer to ordinances, City
policies or programs. For example:
° “Camping and Trespass Enforcement” (Mar. 3, 2025, Item 1):
* “Immigration Policies” (June 10, 2025, 2:00 pm session, Item 1):
» “Middle Housing” (Oct. 7, 2025, Item 11):
* “Heat Safety Ordinance Amendment” (Oct. 28, 2025, Item 14. and Nov. 4, 2025, Item
2):
* “Parks Related Ordinances and Code of Conduct” (Nov. 4, 2025, Item 4):
* “Medical Treatment in the Park” and “Food Sharing in the Park” (Feb. 24, 2026, Items
5 and 6):
* “Council's Community Transparency Initiative” (Mar. 10, 2026. Item 4).
On several of the same notices, lawsuit and claim items cite (A)(3) together with (A)(4).
he AGP UDR? GHGS doodayes aNd ep eyed
7. The Council’s rules of proceedings, City Code § 2-60, are established “[i]Jn accordance with
the provisions of Chapter lV. Section 7 of the Charter.” Rule 12 requires the Council to “hold
all meetings and conduct all business in accordance with” the Arizona Open Meeting Law.
No rule in § 2-60 refers to executive sessions.
8. Two of the Council's rules concern enforcement and interruption:
* Rule 10(a): the Council's rules “shall be enforced by the presiding officer, subject to an
appeal to the Council.”
* Rule 8(d): while a member of the Council is speaking, no other member may interrupt
“except to make a point of order or point of personal privilege.”
9. The Attorney General may sue an individual member of a public body for a knowing violation
of the Open Meeting Law. The court may impose a civil penalty on each person who
Citizen Petition JV-20261021-09 - Presented by Jerry Van Gasse for GOODIGOAT goodgoat.net Page 5 of 9

SUMMARY
knowingly violates the law, and the public body may not pay the penalty on the member’s
behalf or reimburse it.
10. City Code § 2-60 lists sixteen amending ordinances from 1996 to 2021 in its history note.
Rule 10(b) provides: “Unless otherwise provided by law, these rules may be suspended or
modified at any time, by a majority vote of the Council.”
STHX UAY OG BUX tS: }/ 5

Ee LOR COUNCIL ACTION
Petitioner Jerry Van Gasse
Address 4610 E Via Estrella
Phoenix, AZ 85028
Phone (602) 622-3515
Email board@goodgoat.net
Date presented October 21, 2026
Requested Legal Action
For the City of Phoenix Council to vote on the Proposed Measure exactly as
written.
Summary of Proposed Measure
Adopt an ordinance adding a new section to Chapter 2 of the Phoenix City Code that, in any
executive session for which legal advice under A.R.S. § 38-431.03(A)(3) is the only asserted
authority, limits substantive communication to legal advice between Council members and the
City’s attorneys, bars member-to-member deliberation on the matter, and requires the presiding
officer to stop any communication that goes beyond those limits.
Council Action Required
Phoenix City Charter, Chapter IV, Section 22 provides that a written petition presented to the
Council at a regular meeting shall be acted upon by the Council in the regular course of
business, within fifteen (15) days. Section 8 provides that the Council shall act only by
resolution, ordinance, franchise, or formal recorded action. The Proposed Measure is an
ordinance.
Acting upon this petition requires that vote, as its own Formal Agenda item, with this Request
and the Proposed Measure attached. Any change in the substance of the Proposed Measure, in
whole or in part, makes it a different measure from the one proposed by the petitioner, and a
vote on it is not action on this petition. Referral, a staff report, a General Information Packet
entry, continuation, or a consolidated vote also does not act upon this petition.
Citizen Petition JV-20261021-09 - Presented by Jerry Van Gasse for GOOD/GOAT - goodgoat.net Page 7 of 9

PROPUTED MEASURE
Current Code text used Phoenix City Code as published by the City’s codifier at
phoenix.municipal.codes, retrieved October 13, 2026
Codifier’s stated currency Current through Ordinance G-7524, passed June 17, 2026, as stated by
the codifier on October 13, 2026
Amendment marking Additions in CAPITAL LETTERS; deletions in strikethrough.
ORDINANCE G-
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 2, PHOENIX CITY CODE, BY ADDING SECTION
2-___, RELATING TO COMMUNICATIONS DURING EXECUTIVE SESSIONS CONVENED
FOR LEGAL ADVICE.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHOENIX as follows:
SECTION 1. That Chapter 2, Article II of the Phoenix City Code is hereby amended by adding Section
2-____ to read as follows:
2-___. EXECUTIVE SESSIONS CONVENED FOR LEGAL ADVICE.
A. THIS SECTION APPLIES TO AN EXECUTIVE SESSION, OR A SEPARATELY IDENTIFIED
PORTION OF AN EXECUTIVE SESSION, FOR WHICH A.R.S. § 38-431.03(A)(3) IS THE ONLY
ASSERTED AUTHORITY FOR EXCLUDING THE PUBLIC.
B. SUBSTANTIVE COMMUNICATION DURING A SESSION GOVERNED BY THIS SECTION IS
LIMITED TO COMMUNICATION BETWEEN ONE OR MORE COUNCIL MEMBERS AND AN
ATTORNEY OR ATTORNEYS REPRESENTING THE CITY CONCERNING THE MATTER, AND
ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF REQUESTING, PROVIDING, RECEIVING, OR CLARIFYING
LEGAL ADVICE.
C. DURING A SESSION GOVERNED BY THIS SECTION, A COUNCIL MEMBER SHALL NOT
COMMUNICATE WITH ANOTHER COUNCIL MEMBER CONCERNING ANY MATTER
IDENTIFIED FOR EXECUTIVE-SESSION CONSIDERATION. NO PARTICIPANT SHALL INVITE,
FACILITATE, RELAY, OR CONDUCT COMMUNICATION AMONG COUNCIL MEMBERS
CONCERNING:
1. THE FACTS OR MERITS OF THE UNDERLYING MATTER;
2. THE PRACTICAL, POLITICAL, POLICY, BUDGETARY, FINANCIAL, OR OTHER
NONLEGAL IMPLICATIONS OF LEGAL ADVICE;
Se) ALTERNATIVES AVAILABLE TO THE COUNCIL;
4. A COUNCIL MEMBER’S POSITION OR PREFERRED OUTCOME;
ou WHETHER CONSENSUS EXISTS OR MAY BE REACHED;
6. HOW LEGAL ADVICE SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED; OR
7. WHAT ACTION THE COUNCIL SHOULD TAKE.
D. SUBSECTIONS B AND C DO NOT PROHIBIT:
1. AN INTERPRETER OR ACCESSIBILITY AIDE FROM FAITHFULLY TRANSMITTING A
COMMUNICATION OTHERWISE PERMITTED BY THIS SECTION; OR
Citizen Petition JV-20261021-09 - Presented by Jerry Van Gasse for GOODIGOAT goodgoat.net Page 8 of 9

2. AN OBJECTION OR POINT OF ORDER, AN ANNOUNCEMENT OF A CONFLICT OF
INTEREST, A REQUEST TO STOP A COMMUNICATION OR RETURN TO PUBLIC
SESSION, OR A COMMUNICATION STRICTLY NECESSARY FOR SAFETY, EMERGENCY
RESPONSE, OPERATION OF RECORDING OR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT, OR
PERFORMANCE OF A MINISTERIAL DUTY BY THE CITY CLERK. ACOMMUNICATION
UNDER THIS PARAGRAPH SHALL NOT STATE OR CONVEY A COUNCIL MEMBER’S
SUBSTANTIVE VIEW CONCERNING THE MATTER.
E. A PERSON OTHER THAN A COUNCIL MEMBER OR AN ATTORNEY REPRESENTING THE
CITY CONCERNING THE MATTER SHALL NOT PARTICIPATE IN SUBSTANTIVE
COMMUNICATION DURING A SESSION GOVERNED BY THIS SECTION. THIS SUBSECTION
DOES NOT AUTHORIZE ATTENDANCE BY ANY PERSON WHOSE PRESENCE IS NOT
OTHERWISE PERMITTED BY LAW.
F. IF COMMUNICATION IS INDEPENDENTLY AUTHORIZED BY ANOTHER PARAGRAPH OF
A.R.S. § 38-431.03(A), THAT COMMUNICATION MAY OCCUR IN EXECUTIVE SESSION ONLY
AFTER ALL NOTICE AND PUBLIC-AUTHORIZATION REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO THAT
AUTHORITY HAVE BEEN SATISFIED.
G. WHEN COMMUNICATION EXCEEDS THE LIMITS OF THIS SECTION, THE PRESIDING
OFFICER SHALL STOP THE COMMUNICATION IMMEDIATELY. THE EXECUTIVE SESSION
SHALL NOT CONTINUE ON THAT SUBJECT UNLESS THE COMMUNICATION RESUMES
WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THIS SECTION OR PROCEEDS UNDER INDEPENDENTLY
SUFFICIENT AUTHORITY AS PROVIDED IN SUBSECTION F.
H. THIS SECTION IS NOT SUBJECT TO SUSPENSION OR MODIFICATION UNDER RULE 10(B)
OF SECTION 2-60.
SECTION 2. NO APPROPRIATION. This Ordinance appropriates no funds.
SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY. If any provision of this ordinance or its application to any person or
circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity does not affect any other provision or application that can be
given effect without the invalid provision or application.
SECTION 4. This ordinance shall take effect and become operative thirty days after passage.
Citizen Petition JV-20261021-09 Presented by Jerry Van Gasse for GOODIGOAT goodgoat.net Page 9 of 9