Correspondence - Closed Session #3C

Home Browse Search

Orozco, Norma From: Tim Johnson <tjohnson@jlkrllp.com> Sent: Monday, September 20, 2021 4:17 PM To: Hernandez, Johnathan; Sarmiento, Vicente; Penaloza, David; Mendoza, Nelida; Lopez, Jessie; Bacerra, Phil; Phan, Thai; eComment Cc: Ridge, Kristine; Carvalho, Sonia R.; Funk, John Subject: Closed Session Item 3C Attachments: RE: Public Information Request- OCSD Transport to Santa Ana; CORRESPONDENCE- 3.3.20 Closed Session.pdf, SA vs OC Docket History dtd 9.9.21.PNG Council (cc City Manager Ridge and City Attorneys Carvalho and Funk) ... On Tuesday you will be discussing in closed session item 3C. This item is where the City of Santa Ana has brought litigation against the County broadly for disproportionate impact on homelessness, transporting those experiencing homeless across Service Planning Areas (SPAS), and impact of jail policies. My goal with this email is to: 1. Encourage the city to provide an update to the residents about the status of this particular litigation. 2. Provide you information that I have gleaned from my own inquiries that may help you understand the case better and possibly provide information to your legal counsel. Update to the Public We all know that there is no requirement for the city to provide an update, but it seems that the city's handling of this homelessness crisis is always at the top of residents concerns. This is a closed session item and a legal matter. However, it is also a human issue and a resident issue. There is nothing stopping you from providing the public an update on this case. This can be done without divulging private client -attorney information or strategic plans about the case. This litigation was initiated in January 2020 after approval by council. Unfortunately, this litigation has been in "continuance" mode where settlement conferences and hearing of a motion to dismiss keeps getting pushed forward in time. The most recent continuances have been from: 1) June 9 to July 9, 2) July 9 to July 29, 3) July 29 to Aug 18, 4) Aug 18 to Sept 29. That is four continuances with no action. We will see if the conference and motion hearing for Sept 291h is had or if it is further continued. I know that some continuances are necessary logistically or strategically but at the same time the public should have an update. Please see attached a picture of the recent docket history for this case and you will see the continuances as Doc #s 81, 83, 84, 85, and 86. But more importantly, it has been over 20 months since the litigation was initiated and there has not been an update on this case. Certainly, we occasionally have an update on our city's response to those experiencing homelessness in our city but not with regards to the items of this lawsuit. The residents deserve to know what is happening here. urge you to provide an update to the residents of this case. Otherwise, I fear that this case will be similar to another that the city has entered into through its cross -complaint in Case No. SA CV 18-0155-DOC (KESx). That particular case was approved by the city council in April 2018 at which time the city did not actually serve any of the south county cities that was the true target of the litigation and it provided The County (which was served) an indefinite response timeframe to respond to the case. The County has yet to respond to the initiation of this litigation and the city council has never provided an update on this as to their decision not to initiate litigation as it was voted upon at its 4/25/18 council meeting (vote: 6-0, 1 absent). Case Information I know this is long ... attached is also information that shows that OCSD has transported folks across SPA lines for the purpose of providing shelter in violation of the Catholic Worker settlement agreement along with information that the county and cities continue to distribute to those in other SPAS who may be seeking shelter.