Correspondence - #27 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

LOFTIN I BEDELL P.C. Santa Ana Mayor and Council Members c/o City Clerk October 3, 2023 Page 5 of 6 from LoftinlBedell dated August 28, 2023 and September 19, 2023, and from Terry Dowdall dated August 28, 2023. Rather than repeat the content of the referenced correspondence, the correspondence, including all other written, electronic and oral opposition positions presented are hereby specifically incorporated forming the legal and factual Opposition to this Option 3. Based on the Record in this matter and for the foregoing reasons, the request is to TAKE NO ACTION. Second Set of Options Options 4 and 5 are presented as "and/or". The assumption is the Counsel could pass Option 2 or 3 and pass one or both of Options 4 and 5. GENERAL OBJECTION TO BOTH OPTIONS 4 & 5: This set of Options relate to Option 3: "affirming Ordinance NS-3027 and Option 4: limiting the City Council members ability to amend Ordinance NS-3027 by changing the voting requirements in the City Charter for approval for the adoption or amendment of an Ordinance from approval by a majority to approval by a supermajority. The Proposition required under California Election Code section 9222 for Option 3 is Ordinance No. NS-3027 and for Option 4 the basis of the Proposition is Ordinance No.-3027 with the voting requirement amends. Therefore, both Ballot Measures depend upon the legal and factual validity of Ordinance NS-3027. The assumption appears to be that through this mechanism the City will be protected from litigation and the tenants will have long term ordinance protection. Unfortunately, a Ballot Measure with its Proposition invalid, if passed, does not protect a City from litigation challenging the Ordinance created by the Ballot Measure. The additional assumption appears to be that through this mechanism the actions and conduct by certain elected officials and City staff related to the adoption of the Ordinances since 2021 will be protected. The Ballot Measures proposed do not meet the requirements for a City directed Ballot Measure and the staff report presents essentially no factual or legal support for the Ballot Measures.6 OPTION 4 Resolution Giving Notice of a General Municipal Election Affirming Ordinance NS-3027 OPPOSITION: REQUEST TAKE NO ACTION This is a proposal to place Ordinance NS-3027 on the ballot to affirm the actions of the prior City Council actions and approve an Ordinance which currently is legally and factually defective. This is an attempt to circumvent the City Council process and obligation to all members of the public. The opposition to First Set of Options:2 and 3 form the factual and legal basis for the Opposition to this Second Set of Options: 3. The passage of "Measure" at an election will not protect the City from litigation based on the substance of the "Measure", an Ordinance which is defective both legally and 5 Ordinance Nos. 3009, 3010, 3027 and Long Term Implementation Plan, adopted September 6, 2022. 6 Both proposed "Measure Ballots" are incomplete and misleading; Section 20, a standard language provision, but does not protect the Ordinance; Evid.Code sec. 9222 et seq. KMC700426.CCH9.3.2023