HomeMy WebLinkAboutR28-Redevelopment Agency
, R~"" OFl -lIT MENCY.&.ST FOR s......./COUNCIL ABION
\
em:
Dept:
Glenda Saul, Executive Director
Subject:
Proposal from San Bernardino Valley
Municipal Water District Regarding
Pending Litigation
Redevelopment Agency
Date: June 14, 1985
Synopsis of Previous Commission/Council action:
Recommended motion:
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION ACTION
o
Move that Commission adjourn to closed session to discuss pending litigation in the
cases of San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District vs. All Persons Interested
in the Matter of the Tri-Cit Redevelo ment Pro ect San Bernardino Valle Munici al
Water District vs. t e Re evelopment Agency of t e City of San Bernar ino, an San
Bernardino Municipal Water District vs. All Persons Interested in the Matter of the
South Valle Redevelopment Project.
OR,
b. Refer proposal of San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District to Agency staff and
Agency Counsel for a report to Commission in a closed session to be scheduled at the
July I, 1985 meeting of the Commission.
0379T
,~/h ~
Signature
Contact person:GLENDA SAUL
Phone: 383-5081
Supporting data attached:
Ward:
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount: $
Project:
No adverse Impact on City:
Oneil Notes:
Date:
June 17, 1985
Agenda Item No.
28
'R~ OFIlENT AGENCY-RIOJEST FOR c:OIMlSSION/COUNClL Ac())N
STAFF REPORT
o
The San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District has
submitted a proposal for settlement of litigation presently
pending between the Municipal Water District and the
Redevelopment Agency. Three cases have been filed involving
redevelopment projects, being specifically, San Bernardino
Valley Munic~pal Wa~.r niatrict v. All Per.ons Interested in
the Matter of the Tri-City Redevelopment Project, San
Bernardino Superior Court Case No. 219711, San Bernardino
Valley Municipal Water District v. Redevelopment ~gency of the
City of San Bernardino. et al., San Bernardino Superior Court
Case No. 223718, and San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water
District v. All Persons Interested in the Matter of the South
Valle Redevelopment Project, San Bernardino Superior Court
Case No. 224322. All these matters are still pending.
The proposal for settlement was submitted by the Municipal
Water District with their request that the matter be placed on
the Agenda of the June 17 meeting of the Community Development
Commission.
Q
Because this matter is in litigation, it is my recommendation
as Agency Counsel, that this proposal not be discussed in open
session. If the Community Development Commission desires to
hear any presentation by the San Bernardino Valley Municipal
Water District, I would recommend that the Community
Development Commission adjourn to closed session to hear and
consider the proposal.
Preferably, however, it would seem appropriate to refer this
matter to Agency staff and Agency Counsel for a report to the
Commission in closed session at the next regular meeting of
the Community Development Commission, July 1, 1985. This
would enable staff and Agency Counsel to fully evaluate the
proposal, and perhaps prepare a meaningful response.
o