HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 07131993 - X.2 X.2
THE BOARD OR SUPERVISORS OF
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on July 13, 1993 by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Smith, Bishop, McPeak and Torlakson '
NOES: None
ABSENT: Supervisor Powers
ABSTAIN: None
SUBJECT: Report on Court Order to close North Concord
Homeless Shelter on August 1, 1993 .
Supervisor McPeak reported that while the County has
been searching for money and did not have any yet identified,
there was no authorization to go beyond the end of July with the
operation of the North Concord Homeless Shelter, and that Richard
Martinez, Executive Director of the Contra Costa County Housing
Authority, in order to maximize the number of residents during
the next few weeks, has worked out a limited-term stay agreement
for residents.
Supervisor McPeak noted that Superior Court Judge Peter
L. Spinetta, on July 12, 1993, issued his Notice of Decision and
Order prohibiting the County from operating the shelter after
August 1, 1993 pending compliance with all CEQA requirements
pertaining to the operation of a shelter at such location and
amendment of the General Plan to permit such operation.
As recommended by Supervisor McPeak, IT IS BY THE BOARD
ORDERED that Judge Spinetta's decision to close the shelter on
August 1, 1993 is ACKNOWLEDGED, and the proposed limited-term
agreement submitted by the Housing Authority is ENDORSED, and
acceptance of new residents at the North Concord Shelter through
the end of July, 1993 is AUTHORIZED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the Board DECLARES ITS INTENT to
continue efforts to complete the environmental documentation and
be prepared to open the Shelter for a winter program, and do
whatever is necessary to seek the Court's approval of such a
program.
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of
an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervi rs on the date shown.
ATTESTED: &ELIe
3
PHIL BATrkof the Boardof Supervisty Administrator
ga _
Deputy
cc: County Administrator
Richard Martinez, Executive Director
CCC Housing Authority
P. O. Box 2759, Martinez 94553
TUN-29-199.3 15:50 FROM CCC COI itl_EL TO HOUSING RUTH F.002/002
SHELTER TERMINATION STATEMENT
I , , understand that the North Concord
homeless shelter is scheduled to close by July 31, 1993 . I
further understand that, unless the operation of the shelter is
extended beyond July, I must and will leave the shelter by no
later that July 31, 1993 . I further understand that my shelter
stay may be for a very brief period of time.
Dated: , 1993
Shelter Resident' s Signature
J''IH-70-199- ti t=t FROM 0- COLIf I'EL TO HLI IS I NG AI ITH P.Ltd- C-
COUNTY COUNSEL'S OFFICE
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA
CONFIDENTIAL
Date: June 30, 1993
To: Phil Batchelor, County Administrator
Richard Martinez, Housing Authority Director
Perfecto Villarreal, Social Service Director
From: Victor J. Westman, County Counselv-,TK
By: Kevin T. Kerr, Deputy County Counsel
Re: Order to Show Cause Regarding North Concord Homeless Shelter
The Superior Court conducted a hearing late yesterday with
respect to its Order to Show Cause as to why the Court should not
close the North Concord homeless shelter. Judge Peter Spinetta did
not issue a ruling, but took the matter under submission. The Court
will probably render a decision in the next few days . We will let
you know when that decision is issued.
KTK\kv
cc: Scott Tandy, Assistant County Administrator
Alan Pfeiffer, Lease Management, General Services
Bob Drake, Community Development
3:weitmemo.osc
1
C
2 JUL 121 1993
3 S. L. WEIR,COUNTY CLERK
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
4 By
A.Simmons, Deputy
6
7
8 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA
10
11 TAXPAYERS OF THE INDUSTRIAL
12 COMMUNITY OF NORTH CONCORD IN
CONTRA COSTA COUNT, et al. ,
13 Plaintiffs and Petitioners,
14Consolidated Action
VS. NO. C91-05617
15 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, et al. , NOTICE OF DECISION
16AND ORDER THEREON
Defendants and Respondents.
17
1g MEMORY GARDENS, INC. ,
a California corporation,
19 Petitioner and, Plaintiff,
20 . vs.
21 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, et al. ,
22 Respondents and Defendants.
23
24 In December of 1992 this Court ruled that the
25 homeless shelter project on Arnold Industrial Way in north
26 Concord was inconsistent with this County's General Plan and
27 also violated the requirements of the California Environ-
28 mental Quality Act ("CEQA") . The Court, however, did not
1 order the shelter closed at that time. Instead, taking into
2 account all the equities, including the then-upcoming winter
3 season, which was anticipated to be cold and rainy, the Court
4 permitted the shelter to remain open, despite its illegal
5 status, so long as "reasonable, timely and good faith
6 efforts" were being undertaken by the County to bring the
7 shelter into compliance with the law.
8 For some six months after the Court's decision, the
9 County in fact did nothing to bring the shelter in compliance
10 with the law. Finally, in June of this year it entered into
11 a contract with a consultant to assist it in the preparation
12 of an EIR, and now it states that, notwithstanding the
13 aforementioned delay, "it is possible that the North Concord
14 homeless shelter could meet EIR and General Plan requirements
15 in time for this winter" (Respondents' Response to OSC, p. 6,
16 lines 10-11, emphasis added) . However, the County does not
17 say that such occurrence is likely, much less assured; and,
18 in general, it gives the impression that - be it for
19 budgetary or other reasons - it is in no hurry to ."legalize"
20 the shelter.
21 Given the foregoing, the Court has concluded that
22 closure of the shelter pending appropriate amendment to the
23 General Plan and compliance with CEQA is now called for.
24 Such action would provide petitioners with full protection of
25 the law, something to which they are clearly entitled absent
26 compelling countervailing considerations. Information
27 provided the Court by the County indicates that present usage
28 of the shelter is relatively low. It also suggests that
2
I alternative housing could be arranged for those currently
2 using the shelter, if it were no longer operating. Closure
3 of the shelter this summer does not, therefore, threaten to
4 impact the homeless of this County nearly as severely as it
I
5 did last December, ,or would likely next winter. Moreover, by
6 foreclosing the temporary solution afforded by its "illegal"
7 operation, closure' of the shelter pending its legalization
8 may serve to bring about more expeditiously a permanent
9 resolution of the homeless housing problem. It should be
10 further noted thatithe County has indicated that, if the
11 shelter is closed, it can make alternative worthwhile use of
12 the property it leases on Arnold Industrial Way.l Under
13 these circumstances, there no longer appears to be any
14 justification, equitable or otherwise, for permitting the
15 continued operation of the shelter in contravention of the
16 law.
17 Accordingly, counsel for petitioners are ordered to
18 prepare and submit' to the Court, as soon as reasonably
19 possible, an injunction prohibiting respondent from operating
20 a shelter at the subject location pending compliance with all
21 i
lIn noting this, we do not mean to suggest that, in this
22 Court's view, the County should, or is even required to,
23 continue leasing the subject property. It may well be, as
proposed by petitioners, that the lease, having been entered
24 into in furtherance of a project not in compliance with the law,
is void ab initio, in which event, the County could, if it
wished, discontinue use of the property without any further
25 rental liability. The point is, either way, closure of the
26 shelter should not result in any financial loss to the County,
except perhaps in the form of some loss of lease improvements
27 if the property is not put to other uses. . Certainly, the County
has not indicated to this Court any way it might be
28 significantly harmed financially, despite being expressly
invited to do so.
3
1 CEQA requirements pertaining to the operation of a shelter at
2 such location and amendment of the General Plan to permit
3 such operation. The injunction is to go into effect at 12:00
4 noon, August 1, 1993. This is consistent with the July 31,
5 1993 date the County has established for closure of the
6 shelter in any event, if private funds are not raised for its
7 continued operation, and it should provide sufficient time
8 for alternative housing arrangements to be made for present
9 occupants of the shelter.
10 Even after issuance of the injunction, the Court
11 will retain jurisdiction over all matters relating to the
12 shelter's operation or closure as provided in its Order of
13 February 16, 1993; and the injunction will so provide.
14 IT IS SO ORDERED.
15
16 DATED: 1. V
17 If
ETER L. SPI TA, Judg
18 Cont a Costa Count Superio Court
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE 'OF CALIFORNIA
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA
NO. C91-05617
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
I, the undersigned, certify under penalty of perjury
that I am a citizen of the United States, over 18 years of age,
employed in Contra Costa County, and not a party to the within
action; that my business address is Courthouse, Martinez,
California; that I served the attached Notice, Order or Paper by
causing to be placed. a true copy thereof in an envelope addressed
to the parties or attorneys for the parties, as shown below,
which envelope was then sealed and postage fully prepaid thereon,
and thereafter was deposited in the United States Mail at
Martinez, California on the date shown; that there is delivery
service by the United States Mail between the place of mailing
and the placed addressed.
Arlene Segal, Esq. Miye A. Goisher, Esq.
McCABE, SCHWARTZ, EVANS, Managing Attorney
LEVY & DAWE Law Offices of Contra Costa
One Concord Centre Legal Services Foundation
2300 Clayton Rd. , Ste. 1500 1017 Macdonald Ave.
Concord, CA 94520 P.O. Box 2289
Richmond, CA 94802
John Patton, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF JACK PROVINE
500 Ygnacio Valley Rd. , Ste. 300
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Kevin T. Kerr, Esq.
Deputy County Coubnsel
Contra Costa County
Office of County Counsel
P.O. Box 69
Martinez, CA 94553
I declare under penalty of perjury that
the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed at Martinez, California, on 3
by
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
5