Laserfiche WebLink
Page 2 <br />comments during open meetings are accepted as legislative intent, even if the final vote <br />or resolution is different from statements made during the deliberative process. The <br />amicus brief will focus on three issues: (1) A city's General Plan is the guiding planning <br />document and zoning must conform to the General Plan, not the reverse; (2) In cases like <br />this one, courts should use the "no reasonable person" standard; and (3) Relying on <br />comments made during open discussion and deliberation ignores the fact that legislators <br />often gather more information and change their minds. <br />This case could have a devastating impact on fundamental planning issues for all <br />California cities. We believe that the success of the amicus brief and a favorable outcome <br />for the City of Concord will be of great importance to the City of Colton. Therefore we urge <br />the City Council to authorize the City's participation in the amicus curiae brief in the matter <br />of Harvest Church v. City of Concord. <br />ALTERNATIVES: <br />Direct the City Attorney to advise the City of Concord to list the City of Colton as a <br />supporter of the amicus curiae brief. <br />Take no action. <br />FINANCIAL IMPACT: <br />None. <br />ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: <br />None. <br />RECOMMENDATION: <br />Staff recommends that the City Council join in the amicus curiae brief. <br />Report Prepared By: Sonia R. Carvalho, City Attorney <br />Attachment <br />RVPUB\NGS:629169 <br />