August 16, 2011 a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

(7) Alternative Voluntary Redevelopment Program — It is Recommended that the Council (1) Adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 0-02-11, An Urgency Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Colton, California, Authorizing the City of Colton to Participate in the Alternative Voluntary Redevelopment Program Pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Sections 34192, Et Seq., Subject to Certain Conditions and Reservations; (2) Waive Full Reading and Pass First Reading By Title Only of Ordinance No. 0-3-11, an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Colton, California, Authorizing the City of Colton to Participate in the Alternative Voluntary Redevelopment Program Pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Sections 34192, Et Seq., Subject to Certain Conditions and Reservation; (3) (Due to Late Breaking Supreme Court Action on 8-11-11; Report to be Provided at Meeting) Adopt an Enforceable Obligation Payment Schedule in reference to Health and Safety Code Sections 34161-34167 (Report to be Provided at Meeting); and (4) (Due to Late Breaking Supreme Court Action on 8-11-11; Report to be Provided at Meeting) Possibly in lieu of Adopting items (1) and (2), Adopt a Resolution of Intention to Adopt an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Colton, California, Authorizing the City of Colton to Participate in the Alternative Voluntary Redevelopment Program Pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Sections 34192, Et Seq., Subject to Certain Conditions and Reservations. URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. 0-02-11 (NOT ADOPTED); ORDINANCE NO. 0-03-11. City Attorney Derleth gave a brief overview of the "rule of necessity" process and the reasons why certain Council Members will be leaving the dais for this item tonight. He wished to explain why it will not be necessary tonight to use the `Yule of necessity" process that was used on May 10, 2010 when the Redevelopment Agency entered into a Professional Services Agreement with Urban Futures, Inc. to prepare an amendment/merger of the City's redevelopment plans or project areas. The `Yule of necessity" allows officials to participate in decisions where it is not possible to constitute a quorum out of officials who do not have potential conflicts of interest and there is no alternative means of reaching a decision. Based upon the economic interests known as of May 10, 2010, City staff identified five (5) Council Members who appeared to have disqualifying potential conflicts of interests in any decisions concerning the potential amendment/merger, simply due to ownership or other interests in real property or businesses. Those Council Members were Chastain, Bennett, DeLaRosa, Oliva and Yzaguirre. A random means of selecting the minimum number of Council Members needed to participate in the decision (four) was used, and Council Members DeLaRosa and Oliva were allowed to participate along with Council Member Toro and Perez. Once selected, an official typically participates for the duration of the proceedings in all related matters, until his or her participation is no longer legally required, or the need for invoking the exception no longer exists. In this case, two of the "conflicted" Council Members (Chastain and DeLaRosa) are no longer on the City Council, and they have been replaced by Mayor Zamora and Council Member Gonzales, neither of which appears to have a potential conflict of interest. Thus, City Attorney Derleth explained that since there are now four (4) Council Members (Zamora, Gonzales, Toro and Perez) without apparent conflicts of interest, only those four (4) will participate on this matter tonight. 2011 AUGUST 16 REG CC/RDA/CUA/CPFA/CUA MEETING -5-