HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 06271988 - 1.96 og r
To: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FRCM: Victor J. Westman, County Counsel Ck itra
Costa
DATE: June 22, 1988 C J*
SUBJECT: Orange County Development Agreement litigation Support v
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND .JUSTIFICATION
I . RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve and authorize the County Counsel on
behalf of Contra Costa County to join in any amicus curiae brief
prepared defending the constitutionality of development agreements in
the below-discussed pending Orange County development agreement
litigation cases .
II . FISCAL IMPACT: None.
III . REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION: Contra Costa County has entered a
number of development agreements (e.g. , Blackhawk, Canyon Lakes,
Pleasant Hill BART station area) . These Contra Costa County
development agreements have terms that range from 10 to 20 years . The
validity of the terms of such development agreements is being attacked
in pending Orange County litigation. The attack is that such
agreements are unconstitutional because they improperly abridge
(during their terms ) 'a board of, supervisors' police powers to change
the matters agreed to in the development agreements .
IV. BACKGROUND: This Board has received a request from Orange
County's special legal counsel (Morrison & Foerester) asking that
Contra Costa County appear in litigation pending in Orange County in
support of its position that development agreements are
constitutional . Nine Orange County development agreements are being
attacked on the ground that they improperly abridge the police power
of the county's board of supervisors and/or city councils
(subsequently annexing the involved development areas) to take future
regulatory actions that are not consistent with the entered
development agreements . Two of the Orange County development
agreement litigation lawsuits are brought by cities in that County.
The other seven lawsuits are brought by various environmental and
homeowner groups in that County.
V. CONSEQUENCES OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Probably none. Orange
County's position in the pending litigation appears to 'be very
adequately defended by its retained special legal counsel .
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: _ YES SIGNATURE; 4
4!kop-
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 'RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER -
SIGNATURE(S):
ACTION OF POARD ON June 28 , 19 8 8 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT --- ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
cc: County Administrator - ATTESTED _ June 28, l988_._._1_..__ .____
County Counsel PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
BY ` r ,DEPUTY
M382/7-83 -