The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2005 03-22 CC ADJ AGENDA PKTAGENDA OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY Tuesday, March 22, 2005 at 6:00 p.m. City Council Chambers 1243 National City Boulevard National City, CA 91950 ROLL CALL BUSINESS 1. REPORT ON THE PROPOSED 2004 AMENDMENT TO THE NATIONAL CITY REDEVELOPMENT PLAN 2. CLOSED SESSION: Conference with Legal Counsel — Anticipated Litigation Significant Exposure to Litigation Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(6) (one Potential case) PUBLIC ORAL COMMUNICATIONS ADJOURNMENT Next Regular Meeting of the City Council — Tuesday— April 5, 2005 - 6:00 pm — Council Chambers — Civic Center Upon request, this agenda can be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Please contact the City Clerk's Office at 336-4228 to request a disability -related modification or accommodation. Notification 24 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. City of National City COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE: March 22, 2005 AGENDA ITEM NO. ITEM TITLE: PROPOSED 2004 A ENDMENT TO THE NATIONAL CITY REDEVELOPMEN PLAN PREPARED BY: Benjamin Martinez DEPARTMENT Community Development Commission Executive Director The Community Development Commission has prepared the proposed 2004 Amendment to extend the Community Development Commission's eminent domain authority over all properties that are zoned for commercial and industrial use, and all vacant and abandoned properties and buildings, regardless of their zoning designation, within the entire National City Redevelopment Project Area for a period of twelve (12) years from the date of approval, until 2017. Properties that are currently being used for residential purposes would be excluded from eminent domain. Pursuant to the requirements of the California Health and Safety Code (also referred to as the Community Redevelopment Law), duly advertised Joint Public Hearings of the City Council and Community Development Commission were conducted on September 21, 2004, October 5, 2004 and February 22, 2005 to receive and consider all evidence and testimony pertaining the proposed 2004 Amendment. Upon the conclusion of the discussion on February 22nd, the consideration on the proposed 2004 Amendment was continued to March 22, 2005, in order to allow Staff with the opportunity to adjust the eminent domain boundaries, and reduce the number of years that the eminent domain authority would be extended. Since that time, the City Attorney has identified a recent court decision relating to Redevelopment Amendments involving eminent domain authority. Thus, as a precautionary measure, Staff will be working in collaboration with the Redevelopment consultants to prepare a Blight Analysis to accompany the proposed 2004 Amendment, as revised. Staff anticipates publishing a new Joint Public Hearing Notice for the meeting of May 3, 2005, and re -circulating the revised documents for public review. 1 1 Environmental Review N/A Pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Community Development Commission has prepared a Negative Declaration for the proposed 2004 Amendment. As the Lead Agency, the City Council will consider the approval of the Negative Declaration at the same time that it considers the adoption of the proposed 2004 Amendment. Financial Statement There will be no fiscal impact to the City's General Fund as a result of this action. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Conduct and Close the Public Meeting. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Once the appropriate revisions have been made, the Community Development Commission will consider the adoption of a Resolution recommending that the City Council approve the proposed 2004 """emend ment. ATTACHMENTS (Listed Below) Memorandum from City Attorney dated February 22, 2005 Resolution No. TO: Mayor and City Council DATE: February 22, 2005 FROM: City Attorney SUBJECT: Amendment of Redevelopment Plan: Abstention of Members of the City Council and the CDC Board; Legally -Required Participation I request that the following statement be made part of the record pertaining to the proposed Amendment of the Redevelopment Plan: The legislative body of the City of National City is the City Council. As authorized by the Community Redevelopment Law of the State of California, the City Council is also the governing board of the Community Development Commission (the CDC). The Community Redevelopment Law provides that a redevelopment plan may be amended by the adoption of an ordinance by the City Council after a joint public hearing of the City Council and the members of the board of the CDC. In National City, no other body is available to hold a hearing or to adopt an ordinance amending the redevelopment plan. The Political Reform Act of the State of California prohibits a public official from participating in a governmental decision in which the official has a disqualifying conflict of interest. Generally, a public official has a conflict of interest if the decision will have a reasonably foreseeable material financial effect on one or more of the official's economic interests. Pursuant to Section 18704.2 of Title 2, Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations, real property in which a public official has an economic interest is directly involved in a governmental decision if the decision is to adopt or amend a redevelopment plan, and the real property in which the official has an interest is located in the boundaries of the redevelopment area. Pursuant. to Section 18705.2 of Title 2, Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations, where a public official has an interest in real property which is directly involved in a governmental decision, the financial affect of that on the real property is presumed to be material, unless the presumption is rebutted. The residences of Mayor Inzunza, Councilman Parra and Councilwoman Zarate are located in the redevelopment project area. Additionally, Mayor Inzunza has an ownership interest in a duplex residence located at 1416 East 16th Street, also within the project area. A decision to amend the redevelopment plan is being considered by the Amendment of Redevelopment Plan February 22, 2005 Page 2 City Council. Pursuant to the provisions of the Political Reform Act and of Title 2, Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations, Mayor Inzunza, Councilman Parra and Councilwoman Zarate have determined to abstain from participating in the decision to amend the redevelopment plan, because that decision may have a material financial effect on their real property interests located in the project area. Because the abstentions of Mayor Inzunza, Councilman Parra and Councilwoman Zarate result in less than a quorum being available to consider adoption of the ordinance amending the redevelopment plan, the concept of "legally required participation" must be invoked. This concept allows a disqualified official to be re - qualified by a random selection process, and allows a quorum to be present and for the re -qualified official to participate in the decision -making process until it is completed. This process was followed when the proposed Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan was considered at the January 4, 2005 meetings of the City Council and the CDC Board. The process resulted in Councilwoman and Board Member Zarate being requalified to participate. GEORGE H. EISER, III City Attorney GHE/gmo cc: City Manager Executive Director, CDC City Clerk