Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-02-21 - AGENDAS - REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY SPECIAL SESSION (2)1 MINUTES OF CITY OF SANTA CLARITA CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY SPECIAL CLOSED SESSION MEETING CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL PUBLIC PARTICIPATION RECESS CLOSED SESSION ANNOUNCEMENT RECESS CITY ATTORNEY ANNOUNCEMENT 5:00 P.M. WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 1996 Mayor Boyer called to order the special meeting of the City Council and Redevelopment Agency at 5:00 p.m. All Councilmembers were present. There was no public participation. A 5:02 p.m., Mayor Boyer recessed to closed session in the Orchard Room. City Attorney, Carl Newton, announced that this closed session is for the purpose of conference with legal counsel - existing litigation - Government Code Section 54956.9(a) - Castaic Lake Water Agency vs. City of Santa Clarita and Redevelopment Agency #1 AND #2 Mayor Boyer recessed the closed session to the regular meeting of the City Council at 5:29 p.m. City Attorney, Carl Newton, reported on the pending litigation, Castaic Lake Water Agency vs. Santa Clarita, 2 cases, one being the Environmental and the other being the Validation Case. A meeting was scheduled Friday, February 16, between Counsel representing both sides and the Manager of the Water District and the City Manager. The purpose of that meeting was to discuss settlement issues and it was in response to a letter which was sent by the President of the Board, dated the 26th of January, and I have a copy of it here, outlining four points of acceptance. We discussed that letter, and we discussed the settlement issues at this meeting and we reached an agreement between the parties as to basic issues and the agreement was based upon this understanding, and there was concurrence, by the way, on the part of the attorney present and the administrative head of the Water Agency and the City, and that we would present to the City Council and the Board Directors of the Water Agency provisions of the settlement in an appropriate forum by way of settlement agreement. The terms of the settlement were agreed upon were as follows: both parties would accept the Court of Appeal ruling. The Court of Appeal ruling as you all know was in the environmental case and that reversed the determination of trial court in the City's favor. The Court of Appeal ruling ultimately said that the redevelopment plan, the disaster plan required environmental review. The second item of agreement was that the City and the 1 11 Redevelopment Agency and the Castaic Lake Water Agency would enter into an appropriate stipulation in the Superior Court proceeding to terminate the Disaster Recovery Plan. The third point of agreement was that Castaic Lake Water Agency acknowledges that the City and the Community Redevelopment Agency may pursue traditional redevelopment plans in the future which may include earthquake repair and other community needs in accordance with applicable law including the provisions of AB1290. The fourth point of the agreement was that Castaic Lake Water Agency and the City and the Redevelopment Agency shall bear their own respective fees and costs of litigation. That is that neither side would pay either costs of the other side. Those were the four points and it was agreed that a settlement agreement would be prepared by my partner Drew Bridges and presented to the City Council and to the Water Agency for consideration. We received today a proposed stipulation from the attorneys for the Water Agency that is not in concert or in harmony with the agreed upon settlement terms, and we recommend that the City Council not approve that form of stipulation. We have prepared a settlement and release agreement that does incorporate the terms that I just outlined and it is our recommendation that, that settlement and release agreement be approved and executed by the Mayor and the Chairman of the Redevelopment Agency and transmitted to the Board of Directors of the Water Agency for their consideration. It was moved by Heidt and seconded by Darcy to approve the recommendation. On roll call vote: Ayes: Heidt, Darcy, Pederson, Smyth, Boyer Noes: None Absent: None Excused: None Motion carried. CHAIRMAN BOYER As Chairman of the Redevelopment Agency I'll ask for a similar . motion from the Director of the Agency. It was moved by Director Pederson and seconded by Director Smyth to approve the recommendation of the City Attorney. On roll call vote: Ayes: Heidt, Darcy, Pederson, Smyth, Boyer Noes: None Absent: None Excused: None Motion carried. ATTEST: �1G CITY CLERK minfeb21.96.sic 1 Hearing no objections, it was so ordered. MAYOR