HomeMy WebLinkAbout25H - AGMT - CATHOLIC WORKERREQUEST FOR L
COUNCIL ACTION Qt,
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
OCTOBER 1, 2019
TITLE:
APPROVE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
WITH THE ORANGE COUNTY CATHOLIC
WORKER TO RESOLVE CLAIMS
PERTAINING TO HOMELESSNESS IN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CASE
NO. SACV 18-0155-DOC (JDE)
(STRATEGIC PLAN NO. 5 )
/s/ Kristine Ri
CITY MANAGER
RECOMMENDED ACTION
CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY:
❑ As Recommended
❑ As Amended
❑ Ordinance on 1sl Reading
❑ Ordinance on 2od Reading
❑ Implementing Resolution
❑ Set Public Hearing For
CONTINUED TO
FILE NUMBER
Authorize the City Manager to execute a settlement agreement with the Orange County Catholic
Worker, an unincorporated association to resolve claims pertaining to homelessness in United
States District Court Case No. SACV 18-0155-DOC (JDE), subject to non -substantive changes
approved by the City Manager and City Attorney.
DISCUSSION
On January 29, 2018, a federal lawsuit was filed by the Orange County Catholic Worker, a
charitable group serving poor and homeless individuals, to halt efforts by the County of Orange to
remove homeless encampments along the Santa Ana Riverbed, and prevent neighboring cities
from citing or arresting those individuals who violated local ordinances prohibiting camping in public
areas. The lawsuit named the County of Orange, as well as the cities of Anaheim, Costa Mesa,
and Orange, as defendants.
The court temporarily stopped these enforcement activities until the parties reached an agreement
for a more orderly process of transferring individuals from the Santa Ana Riverbed, including the
provision of housing and treatment options for those who desired such services. A similar process
was utilized to relocate individuals from the large homeless encampment that was then situated in
the Civic Center. Following these two efforts, the parties to the litigation remained under the
supervision of the court with respect to their homeless populations, and were encouraged by the
court to reach a voluntary settlement for a more effective solution than would be accomplished
through prolonged litigation.
To influence these settlements more effectively, the City of Santa Ana elected to intervene in the
litigation as a defendant. Due to the City's longstanding unilateral efforts to combat homelessness
without any financial reimbursement, the City also sought to achieve a more coordinated solution
25H-1
Settlement Agreement with Orange County Catholic Worker
October 1, 2019
Page 2
from the County of Orange, and all other cities in the County, by filing a lawsuit of its own against
those entities.
During the course of the litigation, the federal appeals court for the western United States in the
matter of Martin v. City of Boise concluded that municipalities could not enforce anti -camping
ordinances against individuals who do not have access to shelter. Judicial guidance from the local
federal court further established that cities subject to its jurisdiction would need to maintain shelter
beds in order to enforce anti -camping ordinances. With these developments, the defendant cities
began reaching settlement agreements with the Orange County Catholic Worker, requiring them to
operate a certain number of shelter beds, which would need to be made available to homeless
individuals as a condition of enforcing their anti -camping ordinances. Essentially, only if a
homeless individual declined shelter placement could such an ordinance be enforced.
By becoming a defendant in the litigation and filing a cross -complaint of its own, the City has played
a significant role in the resolution of an issue that has long resisted a more global remedy. Not
only have the original defendants settled, but several other Orange County cities (including all of
the cities in the North Service Planning Area) who were not defendants in the original litigation also
agreed to settlements. These settlement agreements afford the type of city -specific and regional
solutions long sought by the City and promoted by the court.
The City of Santa Ana has now reached its own settlement with the Orange County Catholic
Worker. The proposed settlement acknowledges that the City currently operates a 200-bed shelter
(known as The Link), and that the City intends to establish another shelter with 200-250 beds.
There is anticipated to be some overlap period between the operation of these two shelters such
that the total number of beds during this limited period will be up to 450. This will satisfy the City's
bed count obligation as established by the court.
The chief advantages of the settlement for the City are as follows:
• Ability for enhanced enforcement of anti -camping ordinances due to increased beds;
• Removes threat of continuing litigation over enforcement and bed counts;
• No payment of attorney's fees;
• Dismissal of lawsuit against the City;
• Release of all claims against the City;
• Continuing jurisdiction of the court to resolve any disputes over enforcement;
• Greater housing and other opportunities for homeless individuals; and,
• Balances the need for public safety with shelter for homeless individuals.
The City's separate cross -complaint against the County of Orange is not subject to this settlement
agreement and remains pending before the court. In any proposed resolution of that separate
lawsuit, the City will endeavor to attain a further type of coordinated and collaborative solution with
the County reflected by all settlements to date.
25H-2
Settlement Agreement with Orange County Catholic Worker
October 1, 2019
Page 3
Staff recommends approval of the proposed settlement agreement with the Orange County
Catholic Worker for the above reasons. Going forward, the settlement clarifies the City's
obligations regarding its homeless population, as required by the law, while permitting the City to
enforce its anti -camping ordinances with greater confidence.
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
Approval of this item supports the City's efforts to meet Goal #5 — Community Health, Livability,
Engagement & Sustainability.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action.
Exhibit: 1. Settlement Agreement
25H-3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
P-LI1
M
(SBN 162700)
M-29
0192702
15
Attorneys for Defendant and Cross -Claimant
CITY OVF SANTA ANA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
ORANGE COUNTY CATHOLIC
WORKER, an unincorporated
association; Lisa Bell, Shawn Carroll,
Melissa Fields, Larry Ford, Cameron
Ralston, Kathy Schuler, Gloria
Shoemake, as individuals,
Plaintiffs,
V.
ORANGE COUNTY, the City of
Anaheim, the City of Costa Mesa, the
City of Orange, et al.
Defendants.
1
Case No.: SACV 18-0155-DOC (JDE)
25H-4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
City of Santa Ana,
Cross -Claimant,
V.
County of Orange, City of Aliso Viejo,
City of Anaheim, City of Brea, City of
Buena Park, City of Costa Mesa, City of
Cypress, City of Dana Point, City of
Fountain Valley, City of Fullerton, City of
Garden Grove, City of Huntington Beach,
City of Irvine, City of La Habra, City of
La Palma, City of Laguna Beach, City of
Laguna Hills, City of Laguna Niguel, City
of Laguna Woods, City of Lake Forest,
City of Los Alamitos, City of Mission
Viejo, City of Newport Beach, City of
Orange, City of Placentia, City of Rancho
Santa Margarita, City of San Clemente,
City of San Juan Capistrano, City of Seal
Beach, City of Stanton, City of Tustin,
City of Villa Park, City of Westminster
and City of Yorba Linda,
Cross -Defendants.
This Settlement Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into by and between
Defendant and Cross -Claimant City of Santa Ana ("City"), and Plaintiff Orange
County Catholic Worker ("OCCW"), an unincorporated association acting by and
through its designated representatives.
The parties to this Agreement are referred to herein individually as a "Party"
and collectively as the "Parties."
F
25H-5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7,
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
A. WHEREAS, on January 29, 2018, OCCW and certain individual
plaintiffs filed an action, entitled Orange County Catholic Worker et al. v. Orange
County et al., United States District Court, Central District of California, Case No.
8:18-ev-00155-DOC-KES ("OC Catholic Worker Action"), against the County of
Orange ("County"), the City of Anaheim, the City of Costa Mesa, and the City of
Orange.
B. WHEREAS, on March 17, 2018, the City of Santa Ana intervened in
the OC Catholic Worker Action as a defendant.
C. WHEREAS, on April 26, 2018, the City of Santa Ana filed a cross -
complaint in the OC Catholic Worker Action against the County and all other cities
in the County, alleging violations of the: (1) Eighth Amendment (cruel and unusual
punishment); (2) Fourteenth Amendment (equal protection); and (3) Fourteenth
Amendment (due process) ("Cross -Complaint"). The Cross -Complaint was served
on the County, the City of Anaheim, the City of Orange, and the City of Tustin.
The Cross -Complaint remains unserved on all other cross -defendants.
D. WHEREAS, on July 26, 2018, OCCW filed a First Amended
Complaint ("OCCW FAC"), which, among other changes, pleaded a potential class
action against the County. At the time of execution of this Agreement, the OCCW
FAC is the operative complaint in the OC Catholic Worker Action.
E. WHEREAS, on November 13, 2018, OCCW filed a Supplemental
Complaint adding the City of Tustin as a defendant.
F. WHEREAS, on June 28, 2019, OCCW filed a Supplemental
Complaint adding the cities of Brea, Buena Park, Cypress, Fullerton, La Habra, La
Palma, Los Alamitos, Placentia, Stanton, Villa Park, and Yorba Linda as
defendants ("North SPA Cities").
G. WHEREAS, the OCCW FAC as well as the Supplemental
Complaints, alleges that OCCW is an unincorporated association dedicated to the
3
25H-6
1
2
3
4
.51!
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
service and care of the poor in Orange County, and that the individual OCCW
plaintiffs are homeless individuals residing in Orange County. The OCCW FAC
alleges, inter alia, that defendants, and each of them, have violated the OCCW
plaintiffs' rights by enforcing various laws against them, including trespass,
loitering, and/or anti -camping ordinances, at times when, according to the OCCW
plaintiffs, there were no immediately accessible and appropriate beds available to
them in Orange County. The City of Santa Ana disputes the factual allegations and
legal contentions made by OCCW in the OCCW FAC.
H. WHEREAS, the OCCW FAC includes the following causes of action
against the City of Santa Ana as well as other defendants: (1) violation of the
Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, and Article VII,
section 17 of the California Constitution for alleged "cruel and unusual
punishment"; (2) violation of the First and Fourth Amendments to the U.S.
Constitution; (3) violation of the right to due process of law under the Fourteenth
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; (4) violation of California Civil Code section
52.1; (5) violation of California Government Code section 815.6; and (6) violation
of California Government Code section 11135. Defendant City of Santa Ana
disputes each and every claim for relief in the OCCW FAC in its entirety and
disputes OCCW's underlying legal contentions and theories.
I. WHEREAS, the Cities of Anaheim, Costa Mesa, Orange, and Tustin
have each entered into separate settlement agreements with OCCW, all of which
have been approved by the Court.
J. WHEREAS, the North SPA Cities have collectively entered into a
settlement agreement with OCCW that has been approved by the Court.
K. WHEREAS, the City of Santa Ana has voluntarily dismissed all those
parties to the Cross -Complaint that were served such that the County remains the
sole cross -defendant that has been served with the Cross -Complaint.
rd
25H-7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11'
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
L. WHEREAS, without admitting any wrongdoing, liability, or legal
violations on the part of the City of Santa Ana, without conceding the validity of
any of the OCCW's legal theories or claims, and for the sole purpose of
preemptively, economically, and efficiently resolving the OC Catholic Worker
Action as to the City of Santa Ana, the Parties now desire to enter into this
Agreement on the terms set forth herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, for full and valuable consideration, the sufficiency of
which is hereby acknowledged, and based upon the foregoing Recitals, and the
terms, conditions, covenants, and agreements herein, the Parties agree as follows:
1. Order re Continnin�iction and Effective Date
Following the full execution of this Agreement by all Parties, the Parties
shall file with the Court in the OC Catholic Worker Action proposed orders
regarding settlement and continuing jurisdiction and incorporating the terms of this
Agreement. Except for the obligations of the City in Section 3, the obligations of
the Parties in the remaining sections of this Agreement, and the releases contained
herein, shall become effective and operative on the date(s) on which the respective
order is fully executed and entered by the Court ("Effective Date"), and shall be
contingent upon the Court's signing and entry of the respective order. The
obligations of the City in Section 3 shall become effective and operative only upon
the Court's approval of a separate settlement agreement between the City and
County as to the City's Cross -Complaint, including but not limited to the subjects
of a replacement site for the County -operated shelter known as the "The
Courtyard" and the parties' obligations under a related Memorandum of
Understanding currently in effect between them. This Agreement shall be in effect
for three (3) years following the Effective Date and then shall terminate.
E
25H-8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2. Incorporation of Recitals
The representations in the above -section of this Agreement, entitled
"Recitals," are hereby incorporated into and made a material part of the terms and
representations of this Agreement.
3. Construction and ®aeration of Shelters
3.1 At the time of this Agreement, the City operates a temporary,
low -barrier shelter in the City with a capacity of 200 beds, known as "The Link."
3.2 The City shall fund, obtain funding for, and/or coordinate third -
party funding for, the construction and operation of an additional low -barrier
homeless shelter at a different location within the boundaries of the City, with
capacity of 200 beds, expandable to 250 beds ("Additional Shelter"). The City
shall have complete discretion in determining which Additional Shelter to fund and
which shelter project may be feasible, subject to any limitations set forth herein.
The City's funding commitment for the Additional Shelter shall be for three (3)
years, beginning on the Effective Date.
3.3 There will be an overlap period of time during which The Link
and the Additional Shelter will operate concurrently such that the total number of
beds during this time will be up to 450. Any remaining number of beds that may
be necessary to satisfy the City's obligations under Section 3 of this Agreement
shall be addressed in the context of a separate settlement agreement between the
City and County as to the City's Cross -Complaint.
3.4 The City shall require that the Link and the Additional Shelter
be operated on a non -religious basis, but not exclude religious organizations from
operating, and in full compliance with all applicable state and federal
antidiscrimination laws, including but not limited to, California Government Code
section 11135 and the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. section 12101 et
seq.
3
25H-9
1
2
3
4'
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3.5 Although the above -referenced shelters are not the exclusive
means by which the City may satisfy its obligation to meet the needs of homeless
individuals in the City, OCCW Plaintiffs acknowledge and agree that the creation
and operation of The Link and the Additional Shelter, or a number of placements
equal to The Link and the Additional Shelter, shall satisfy the City's obligations
under Section 3 of the Agreement, as well as any other requirement by the Court
pertaining to the number of available beds for the unsheltered individuals in the
City.
4. Enforcement of Anti®Camnin� Ordinances
4.1 The City shall establish the following policies and procedures
relating to the enforcement of Santa Ana Municipal Code sections 10-400 to 10-
403 and 10-550-551 ("Anti -Camping Ordinances"), curfews including park hours,
or any comparable provisions of state law, or any law concerning "loitering"
against homeless individuals within its jurisdictions. This shall apply to the City
and its agents including but not limited to private security:
4.1.1 Absent exigent circumstances, any enforcement of the
Anti -Camping Ordinances against a homeless individual (including any of the
Individual OCCW Plaintiffs) will first be preceded by contacts from outreach and
engagement personnel to determine an available and appropriate placement for the
individual in question, per the procedures outlined herein. For purposes of this
Agreement, "outreach and engagement personnel" may include County Outreach
and Engagement Personnel, representatives from CityNet, City employees, the
homeless liaison, police officers, and any other organizations with which the City
has contracted for such outreach and engagement services (collectively, "O&E
Personnel") who are trained in engaging in appropriate clinical assessments of
individuals with disabilities to determine an appropriate placement.
4.1.2 In implementation of Section 4.1.1, prior to enforcement
of the Anti -Camping Ordinances against any homeless individual, O&E Personnel
7
25H-10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
will locate and offer an available and appropriate placement in the City for the
individual in question.
4.1.3 If the individual declines the offered placement, the City
may proceed with enforcement of the Anti -Camping Ordinances in its sole
discretion subject to the dispute resolution process detailed herein.
4.1.4 If the alleged violation arises from an individual's
presence in a park outside of the established operational hours of the park, and if
there is no appropriate and immediately available placement for that person, the
City will advise the individual that they must leave the park and move to any
public area outside of the park. If the person does not leave the park after
receiving this warning, the City may issue a citation to the individual.
4.1.5 The requirements of this Section 4.1 shall only apply
until the earlier of: (a) the date on which the case of Martin v. City of Boise, 902
F.3d 1031 (9th Cir. 2018) ("Martin v. Boise") is no longer applicable law within
the jurisdiction of the Ninth Circuit or (b) the date on which the Court finds that
there are sufficient appropriate and immediately available placements for the
unsheltered homeless population in the City.
4.2 Nothing in this Agreement constitutes an admission by the City
that its current policies and procedures for enforcement of the Anti -Camping
Ordinances are either: (a) different from those set forth above or (b) in any way
legally inadequate, or a concession by the OCCW Plaintiffs that they are legally
adequate.
4.3 Nothing in this Agreement constitutes a promise,
representation, or warranty, on the part of the City, that any number of beds will be
available to any particular person(s) at any time. The lack of availability of an
appropriate and immediately accessible bed for any person or persons at any time,
including any of the individual OCCW plaintiffs, may impact the ability of the
City to punish a purported violation of the Anti -Camping Ordinances.
25H-11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4.4. Absent exigent circumstances, the City shall not cite or arrest
any homeless individual for violation of the law based on an alleged obstruction of
public property unless that individual, either individually or in conjunction with his
or her property, actually obstructs free passage of any person or vehicle on any
public highway, alley, sidewalk, or crosswalk and declines to move the object(s)
creating obstruction from the public right of way after being requested to do so, or
actually obstructs with access to a public highway, alley, sidewalk, or crosswalk
for sanitation, cleaning, or routine maintenance or repair purposes and declines to
cease the obstruction after being requested to do so.
4.5 Nothing in this Agreement shall impact the authority of the City
to enforce any law not based on an individual's unsheltered status against a person
believed to be homeless, including issuing and arresting the person for an alleged
violation of law.
5m Dispute -Resolution Process
The Court shall retain jurisdiction over the OC Catholic Worker Action for a
period of three years from the Effective Date for the purposes of (a) overseeing the
implementation of this Agreement, and (b) implementing and presiding over the a
dispute -resolution process (the "Dispute -Resolution Process") to be established by
the Court and to which Plaintiffs and the City hereby consent and agree:
5.1 Except as expressly identified in this Agreement, or as may be
modified by the Court or the Parties, with the Court's consent, during the three-year
period of the Court's continued jurisdiction, this Dispute -Resolution Process shall
apply to adjudicate any and all disputes between, on the one hand, the City, and, on
the other hand, any homeless individual or individuals who consent, at the time of
requesting the Dispute -Resolution Process, to be bound by the Dispute -Resolution
Process and the provisions of this Agreement applicable to the OCCW Plaintiffs
(including but not limited to the individual OCC W plaintiffs), relating to (a) the
implementation of this Agreement, and/or (b) the enforcement of the above-
M
25H-12
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
identified Municipal Code sections, or other laws applied against any homeless
person arising out of that individual's homeless status, including but not limited to
disputes regarding the availability or adequacy of any shelter or shelter services
offered to the individual pursuant to Section 4.1 of this Agreement and expressly
excluding violations of law relating to conduct not arising from the individual's
homeless status (examples include but are not limited to possession of illegal
substances or weapons, trespass on private property, acts of violence, public
intoxication, etc.) (collectively, the "Disputes," and individually, a "Dispute").
5.2 In the event of any Dispute arising during the pendency of the
Court's retained jurisdiction, the parties to that Dispute will first attempt to meet an(
confer informally with the other side in an effort to resolve it. In the case of a
Dispute raised by one or more homeless individuals against the City, or a Dispute
raised by the City against one or more homeless individuals, including any such
persons who are known to be, or the City is advised are, represented by counsel of
record in the OC Catholic Worker Action, this attempt will at least involve (a) a
written communication from the party initiating the Dispute to the other side's
counsel describing in detail the Dispute and the requested remedy, and providing
any available evidence in relation thereto, and (b) a discussion, either in person or
via telephone, seeking to resolve the Dispute. In the event the City receives a
complaint from a homeless individual, City employees, as well as the employees of
any City shelter facility, shall give any affected individual notice of the Court's
Dispute -Resolution Process and the contact information for applicable legal services
organizations, including the law center associated with Plaintiffs' counsel, together
with a statement that such entities may be available to assist them.
5.3 If the parties to a Dispute are unable to resolve it within two (2)
court days after it is first raised informally by one of the parties to the Dispute, any
party to the Dispute may request a hearing with the Court under the standards and
10
25H-13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
processes to be set by the Court, and the Court will have jurisdiction to resolve that
Dispute. If the Dispute involves an emergency situation that presents a threat to the
immediate health and safety of an individual, the parties may seek expedited review
by the Court.
5.4 The fact that a person has initiated the Dispute -Resolution
Process shall not impact the City right to enforce any law against that person,
including issuing citations to the person, concurrently with the Dispute -Resolution
Process. However, the City agrees that no custodial arrest will be made for a
violation of the anti -camping, loitering, and similar laws arising from an
individual's status as homeless prior to the exhaustion of the Dispute -Resolution
Process with the Court pursuant to Section 5.3 of this Agreement. In circumstances
involving citation, the Court may issue an order directing the City to stay the filing
of formal charges against the homeless individual until the Dispute -Resolution
Process has been completed for that Dispute. The City agrees not to contest such a
request for a brief stay of the filing of charges. Once the Dispute -Resolution
Process has concluded regarding an issue, the City will not be required to await
exhaustion of the Dispute -Resolution Process regarding the same issue and the same
individual prior to a custodial arrest where the individual does not comply with a
warning or leave once a citation has been issued, provided the City complies with
the Court's determination of that same issue for that same individual. For purposes
of the Section 5.4, "same issue" refers to an issue determined by the Court in the
Dispute -Resolution Process where the individual's objections, including any claim
of alleged disability, physical limitations and the offered placement are substantially
similar for purposes of determining whether the individual's disability or other
objection is being reasonably accommodated.
5.5 In resolving any Dispute, the Court may enforce any rights
available to a party under this Agreement, subject to sufficient notice, opportunity
I
25H-14
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13'
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
be heard, briefing, evidence, and other due process. The Court shall not be
empowered to award damages or any other monetary relief to any party as a result
of any Dispute submitted to this process. Nothing in this Agreement limits the
ability of any Plaintiff to seek damages in other proceedings not subject to this
Agreement.
5.6 Should either party disagree with the Court's determination
resulting from the Dispute -Resolution Process, nothing in this Agreement shall
preclude either party from commencing litigation concerning the subject of said
Dispute, and pursuing any remedies available at law; provided that in advance of
initiating such action, the parties shall first engage in an in -person meet -and -confer
to occur within seven (7) calendar days of a request from the other party.
6. Release and Covenant Not to Sue
6.1 In consideration for the terms of this Agreement, OCCW
Plaintiffs, and each of them, and any other individual claiming rights under this
Agreement (the "OCCW Releasing Parties"), hereby release and forever discharge
the City of Santa Ana, as well as its present and former employees, agents,
managers, officers, directors, councilmembers, insurance companies, attorneys,
departments, and divisions or affiliated entities, whether previously or hereafter
affiliated in any manner (the "City Released Parties"), from and against any and all
claims, demands, causes of action, obligations, damages, attorney's fees, costs, and
liabilities, arising from or relating to the events detailed in the lawsuit of any nature
whatsoever, whether or not now known, suspected, or claimed, which the OCCW
Releasing Parties, and/or any of them, have, or ever may claim to have, as against
the City Released Parties, or any of them, whether directly or indirectly, relating to,
or arising out of the: (a) OC Catholic Worker Action; (b) any claims raised in, or
that could been raised in, the OC Catholic Worker Action; (c) the availability of
homeless shelters, shelter beds, and/or other homeless accommodations in the City
of Santa Ana; (d) the City's alleged obligation to provide or fund such
12
25H-15
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
accommodations; and/or (e) the City's alleged inability to enforce any of the Anti -
Camping Ordinances and any law that the OCCW Releasing Parties claim
criminalizes a person's homeless status, against any person because of his or her
homeless status (collectively, the "OCCW Released Claims").
6.2 The releases set forth in Section 6.1 are releases of all claims,
demands, causes of action, obligations, damages, and liabilities, of any nature
whatsoever, and are intended to encompass all known and unknown, foreseen and
unforeseen, claims that are possessed by the OCCW Releasing Parties and within
the scope of the OCCW Released Claims based solely and only on the events
giving rise to the OC Catholic Worker Action. To effectuate the intent of the
Parties, the OCCW Releasing Parties expressly agree to waive and relinquish all
rights and benefits they may have under California Civil Code Section 1542, which
reads as follows:
A general release does not extend to claims that the creditor or
releasing party does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at
the time of executing the release and that, if known by him or her,
would have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor or
released party.
6.3 The OCCW Releasing Parties warrant that they have made no
assignment, and will make no assignment, of any claim, chose in action, right of
action, or any right, of any kind whatsoever, within the scope of the OCCW
Released Claims, and that no other person or entity of any kind had or has any
interest in any of the demands, obligations, actions, causes of action, debts,
liabilities, rights, contracts, damages, attorney's fees, costs, expenses, losses, or
claims within the scope of the OCCW Released Claims.
7. Dismissal of the OC Catholic Worker Action
Upon entry of the Court's Order re Continuing Jurisdiction and Settlement,
the OCCW Plaintiffs, as to the City, will take all necessary actions and file all
13
25H-16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
necessary documents to effectuate dismissal of the OC Catholic Worker Action
with prejudice.
8. Settlement Payments and Attorney's Fees
All Parties to this Agreement shall bear their own costs, expenses, and
attorney's fees in relation to or arising out of. (a) the OC Catholic Worker Action;
(b) the resolution, negotiation, and settlement of the OC Catholic Worker Action,
including the negotiation of this Agreement; and (c) the implementation of this
Agreement.
9. Non -Admission of Liability
By entering into this Agreement, the City does not admit any liability, and
explicitly denies any liability or wrongdoing of any kind arising out of or relating
to any of the claims alleged in the OC Catholic Worker Action. Nothing herein
constitutes an admission by the City as to any interpretation of laws, or as to the
merits, validity, or accuracy of any of the claims or legal contentions made in the
OC Catholic Worker Action. The City has entered into this Agreement solely to
avoid the time, expense, and risk of continued litigation. The Parties agree that an
express condition of this settlement is that there has been no finding of liability on
the merits, and that this settlement and any document related to this settlement,
including this Agreement and any related orders, and the negotiations leading up to
this settlement, shall be inadmissible in evidence and shall not be used for any
purpose in this or any other proceeding, except in an action or proceeding to
approve, interpret, or enforce this Agreement.
10. Knowing and Voluntary
This Agreement is an important legal document that has been voluntarily
and knowingly executed by the Parties. The Parties, and each of them, specifically
represent that, prior to signing this Agreement: (a) they have each been provided a
reasonable period of time within which to consider whether to accept this
Agreement; (b) they have each carefully read and fully understand all of the
14
25H-17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
provisions of this Agreement; and (c) they are voluntarily, knowingly, and without
coercion entering into this Agreement based upon their own judgment. The
OCCW Plaintiffs and City further specifically represent that, prior to signing this
Agreement, they have conferred with counsel of their choice to the extent desired
concerning the legal effect of this Agreement, and that the legal effect of this
Agreement has been adequately explained to them.
11. Entire Agreement
This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement by and between the OCCW
Releasing Parties and the City Released Parties regarding the matters discussed
herein, and supersedes any and all other agreements, understandings, negotiations,
or discussions, either oral or in writing, express or implied, between the OCCW
Releasing Parties and the City Released Parties relating to the subject matter
hereof. The OCCW Releasing Parties and the City Released Parties each
acknowledge that no representations, inducements, promises, agreements, or
warranties, oral or otherwise, have been made by them, or anyone acting on their
behalf, which are not embodied in this Agreement, that they have not executed this
Agreement in reliance on any such representation, inducement, promise,
agreement, or warranty, and that no representation, inducement, promise,
agreement, or warranty not contained in this Agreement, including but not limited
to, any purported supplements, modifications, waivers, or terminations of this
Agreement, shall be valid or binding, unless executed in writing by all of the
Parties to this Agreement. Any alteration, change, or modification of or to this
Agreement shall be made by written instrument executed by each Party in order to
become effective.
12. Warranty of Authority
Each individual or entity that executes this Agreement represents and
warrants, in his, her or its personal capacity, that he, she, or it is duly authorized
15
25H-18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
and empowered to enter into this Agreement on behalf of the party it purports to
represent.
13. Counterparts
This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which
shall be considered an original but all of which shall constitute one agreement.
14. No Waiver of Terms of Agreement
The failure to insist upon compliance with any term, covenant, or condition
contained in this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of that term, covenant,
or condition, nor shall any waiver or relinquishment of any right or power
contained in this Agreement at any one time or more times be deemed a waiver or
relinquishment of any right or power at other time or times.
15. Modification of Agreement
The enforcement terms of this Agreement may be vacated or modified, at the
request of any Party hereto, if: (a) the holding of Martin v. Boise is reversed or
modified, or is otherwise no longer good law; (b) the Court determines that the
number of available and appropriate shelter placements in the City warrants
termination or modification of the Agreement; or (c) upon petition by the City, the
Court determines that other terms of the Agreement have been met.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Settlement Agreement is hereby entered into
and executed by the parties hereto on the dates set forth below.
Dated• 2019
OC CATHOLIC WORKER
16
25H-19
I
2
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
19
20
21
22
M
24
25
26
27
28
/X.
Carol A. S el
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
coy .____�_
Brooke Weitzman
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Dated2019
Assist ant City Attorney
Jo Funk
ney
FATTEST
Daisy Gomez
Clerk of the Council
l
BY
I fistine Ridge
City Manager
17
25H-20