Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06.a.1) (Handout) Request of Maryann Cella from Save Open Space-Danville to reconsider participation in District Annexation 186 (Magee Ranch)d o.i) CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT #*Ad ", �) BOARD MEETING February 19, 2015 RE: AGENDA ITEM 6.a.1.: DISTRICT ANNEXATION 186 (MAGEE RANCH) To CCCSD Board Members: RECOMMENDED ACTION: SOS- Danville, a grassroots organization comprised of hundreds of Danville area residents, respectfully but strongly disagrees with Staffs recommendation that the Board "[a]llow LAFCO's processing of District Annexation 186 to continue ". Rather, the Board should be revisiting its approval of DA 186, and rescinding it. Then the Board should consider the matter again in light of Judge Austin's decision. Upon reconsideration, the Board should not approve DA 186. Staff has prepared for the Board a "District Annexation 186 -- -Magee Ranch Timeline" in support of its recommendation that the Board do nothing. Once again, critical information has been left out. First, there is no mention that the Board did not even know about the litigation when it made its decision on June 19, 2014, to approve DA 186. Staff and the applicant had a responsibility to inform the Board about it, but they chose not to. Second, there is a mention that the hearing in the lawsuit was 6 days after the Board's approval. BUT THERE IS NO MENTION THAT A TENTATIVE RULING WAS EXPECTED AND IN FACT WAS PUBLISHED 5 DAYS AFTER THE BOARD'S APPROVAL. The tentative ruling was the same as the final ruling, which found the EIR to be legally invalid, and found that the Town of Danville's approval was in violation of CA Planning and Zoning law, the 2010 Danville General Plan, and Ballot Measure S, which requires a public vote on the "Magee Ranches" project. When LAFCO learned full information about the litigation - - -- information that was brought to its attention by SOS - Danville, and not SummerHill Homes or Central San Staff - -- LAFCO did not approve the annexation, but continued the matter as long as it legally could. This Board, not Staff and not SummerHill Homes, has the duty to decide whether / to approve the Magee Ranches" District Annexation in light of the litigation and injunction against the "Magee Ranches" project and development permits regarding it. Now that this Board is fully apprised of the facts of this matter, it should revisit its approval of the annexation and not as staff recommends do nothing, thereby perpetuating the appearance of impropriety that surrounds the first annexation approval, when the Board did not have critical information to make an informed decision. When it revisits the matter, the Board should rescind the earlier approval made without knowledge of the litigation. Then the Board should consider the matter again in light of Judge Austin's decision. Upon reconsideration, the Board should not approve DA 186 because such an action would be violating the injunction, acting on a legally invalid EIR, and most importantly demonstrating that there is no consequence for withholding key information from the Board in the future.