Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council resolution 02-017 RESOLUTION NO. 02-017 0 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA ENDORSING ASSEMBLY BILL 2515 WHEREAS, resident of Saratoga have for many years expressed concern that a stadium facility at the West Valley College campus of the West Valley-Mission Community College District ("District") would have serious adverse consequences for the community; and WHEREAS, at the time the campus was proposed in the late 1960s, the District proposed that no stadium would be developed as part of the campus and agreed to issuance of a use permit for the campus subject to the condition that no stadium would be developed; and WHEREAS, the District confirmed its agreement with this condition in 1979 by proposing an amendment to its use permit clarifying the stadium limitation and agreeing that the limitation would continue to apply even in the vent that the use permit itself ceased to apply; and WHEREAS, the City approved the amendment proposed by the District without opposition by the District; and WHEREAS, the District has claimed that it is not obligated to comply with the stadium limitation or any other provision of the use permit by virtue of Government Code section 53094; and WHEREAS, the Legislature could not have intended to authorize community college districts to renege on agreements made with local governments; and WHEREAS, Assembly Bill 2515, introduced by Assembly member Fred Keeley and attached hereto as Exhibit A, would amend Government Code section 53094 to require community college districts to abide by agreements made with local governments during the land use planning process. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby endorses Assembly 1311i 2515 and urges the legislature of the State of California to adopt the measure in order to remedy the inequitably manner in which Government Code section 53094 is being applied; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby directs the City Manager to cause a copy of this resolution to be provided to Assembly Member Keeley and such other members of the Legislature, as the City Manager deems prudent to promote passage of the bill. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Saratoga City Council, State of California, this 20th day of 46.0 March, 2002, by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers Stan Bogosian, John Mehaffey, Ann Waltonsmith Vice Mayor Evan Baker, Mayor Nick Streit NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Nick Streit, Mayor TEST: / 1`i iTCATFOlelialirr Attachments `r Exhibit A: Assembly Bill 2515 Extnibl A- CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE-2001-02 REGULAR SESSION tipe ASSEMBLY BILL No. 2515 Introduced by Assembly Member Keeley February 21, 2002 An act to amend Section 53094 of the Government Code,relating to zoning. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST AB 2515, as introduced, Keeley. Zoning: community college district. Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district,by vote of 2/3 of its members,to render a city or county zoning ordinance inapplicable to a proposed use of property by the school district except when the proposed use of the property by the school district is for nonclassroom facilities. This bill would also except from the authority of the governing board of a school district to take that action,a proposed use by a community college district that would conflict with a use permit condition proposed by the district and adopted by the city or county without objection from the district. Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no. State-mandated local program:no. The people of the State of Califinnia do enact as follows: 1 SECTION 1. Section 53094 of the Government Code is 2 amended to read: 3 53094. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this 4 article,this article does not require a school district to comply with 09 P 4 AB 2515 —2— kW 1 the zoning ordinances of a county or city unless the zoning 2 ordinance ...mak.,., pr.,..,,n,.. provides for the location of public 3 schools and unless the city or county has adopted a general plan. 4 (b) Notwithstanding subdivision(a), the governing board of a 5 school district;that has complied wither Section 6 65352.2 of this code and Section 21151.2 of the Public Resources 7 Code,by a vote of two-thirds of its members,may render a city or 8 county zoning ordinance inapplicable to a proposed use of 9 property by the school district. The governing board of the school 10 district may not take this action when either the proposed use of 11 the property by the school district is for nonclassroom facilities, 12 including, but not limited to, warehouses, administrative 13 buildings, and automotive storage and repair buildings, or the use 14 is proposed by a community college district and would conflict 15 with a use permit condition proposed by the community college 16 district and adopted by the city or county without objection from 17 the community college district. 18 (c) The governing board of the school district shall,within 10 19 days, notify the city or county concerned of any action taken 20 pursuant to subdivision(b). If the governing board has taken such 21 an action, the city or county may commence an action in the 22 superior court of the county whose zoning ordinance is involved 23 or in which is situated the city whose zoning ordinance is involved, 24 seeking a review of the action of the governing board of the school 25 district to determine whether it was arbitrary and capricious. The 26 city or county shall cause a copy of the complaint to be served on 27 the board. If the court determines that the action was arbitrary and 28 capricious, it shall declare it to be of no force and effect, and the 29 zoning ordinance in question shall be applicable to the use of the 30 property by the school district. 31 SEC. 2. It is the intent of the Legislature that the provisions 32 of this act be given retroactive effect. Therefore, any action taken 33 prior to January 1, 2003,by a community college district to render 34 a city or county zoning ordinance inapplicable to a proposed use 35 of property is hereby declared to be void and of no force or effect 36 if the proposed use would conflict with a use permit condition 37 proposed by the community college district and adopted by the city 38 or county without objection from the community college district. 0 99 P L