HomeMy WebLinkAbout12 - CC-10 - Delegation of Authority to City Manager - 3/16/20211
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: March 16, 2021 ITEM NUMBER: CC-10
SUBJECT: DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY TO CITY MANAGER AND CITY
ATTORNEY REGARDING NUISANCE ABATEMENT ACTIONS
DATE: MARCH 8, 2021
FROM: LORI ANN FARRELL HARRISON, CITY MANAGER
PRESENTATION BY: LORI ANN FARRELL HARRISON, CITY MANAGER
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LORI ANN FARRELL HARRISON
(714) 754-5328
RECOMMENDATION:
Affirm the City Council’s action taken in closed session on March 2, 2021 and reported
out during the open meeting delegating authority to the City Manager and the City
Attorney to pursue nuisance abatement actions against operators of “sober living” group
homes who are already engaged in pending litigation with the City.
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS:
At its closed session meeting on March 2, 2021, City Council had on its agenda for
discuss and potential action, among other things, pending litigation in Insight Psychology
v. City of Costa Mesa, Central District of California Case No. 8:20-cv-00504 JVS (JDEx)
(item 5) and one item of potential litigation pursuant to Pursuant to Subdivision (d)(4) of
Section 54956.9 California Government Code relating to initiation of litigation (item 7).
In closed session, item number 7 related not to Insight Psychology, but to the potential
for initiation of litigation against a different party operating group homes at various
locations throughout the City which are not the subject of existing litigation but where the
operator is or was involved in separate litigation against the City for different locations.
The pending litigation with that operator was not discussed. Rather than take action
directing initiation of litigation against that operator, the City Council acted to authorize
the City Manager and the City Attorney to determine whether to initiate litigation for
nuisance abatement in appropriate cases for operators with whom the City has been
previously involved in litigation, regarding properties in the City where they are operating
group homes in violation of the City’s ordinances, and to initiate litigation where they deem
appropriate without seeking additional and separate approval from the City Council in
closed session.
2
A claim has been asserted that the action taken by Council violated the Brown Act
because only one item of anticipated litigation was listed on the agenda. While staff
understood Council’s action was to authorize the specific potential litigation agendized,
and to thereafter delegate to the City Manager and City Attorney the decisions on
pursuing nuisance abatement actions against operators of group homes in violation of the
City’s codes – without discussion or direction on any other individual operator -- to avoid
any question of compliance with the Brown Act, staff has reagendized both Insight
Psychology and the case of potential litigation1 discussed on March 2, 2021, so as to cure
any Brown Act violations which occurred regarding agenda listings, public comment or
reporting out, due to inadvertence.
In addition, to address any concern regarding the action taken by Council to delegate to
the City Manager and City Attorney future decisions about particular nuisance abatement
actions, this item has been included in the City Council’s regular meeting agenda for
public discussion and action. No specific litigation matter has been identified on the
agenda relating to this action because at this point, no specific operator or location(s)
have been identified which may be subject to such decisions. To be clear, staff is
requesting that the City Council give the City Manager and the City Attorney the authority
to evaluate potential issues and authorize nuisance abatement actions deemed
necessary in the future for violations by operators who have previously been involved in
litigation with the City regarding illegal group home operations.
Affirming the City Council’s delegation of authority to the City Manager and the City
Attorney to pursue nuisance abatement actions, whether by way of cross-complaint or
new filings, concerning operators with whom the city has been engaged in litigation over
non-compliance with the City’s group home ordinances, will cure any alleged Brown Act
violation associated with the agendizing, action, or reporting out concerning this item. It
will also save the City attorney’s fees for outside counsel and code enforcement staff to
prepare numerous reports regarding the basis of such actions for City Council
consideration, expedite decisions in cases where City codes on group home requirements
are being ignored or defied, reduce the length of closed sessions, and support the City
Council’s goal of keeping the community safe. The city will continue to publish litigation
reports regarding all pending litigation matters and the City Council will continue to be
informed regarding all actions taken. Any particular matter may be agendized for City
Council discussion and action at any time.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:
The City Council may direct staff to continue agendizing each potential nuisance
abatement action for known operators for closed session discussion.
FISCAL REVIEW:
The fiscal impact of this item is unknown at this time.
1 Other potential litigation items on the March 16, 2021 closed session agendas relate to matters other than those
discussed on March 2, 2021.
3
LEGAL REVIEW:
The City Attorney’s Office has prepared this report.
CONCLUSION:
Staff recommends that City Council affirm delegating authority to the City Manager and
City Attorney to pursue nuisance abatement actions against operators of group homes
violating the City’s ordinances who are or have been engaged in pending litigation with
the City.
___________________________ __________________________
LORI ANN FARRELL HARRISON KIMBERLY HALL BARLOW
City Manager City Attorney
____________________________
CAROL MOLINA
Finance Director