At the August 12, 2020 City Council meeting, Council directed staff to draft an easy-to-follow ordinance that would allow hens in residential zones of the City. Council also directed staff to have the Legislative & Litigation Committee (Committee herein) review and discuss the draft ordinance before the September 23, 2020 City Council meeting.
On September 8, 2020, the Committee held a special meeting and listened to a PowerPoint presentation from the City Attorney’s office explaining the new draft ordinance.
At the September 23, 2020 City Council meeting, Council had First Reading of the hen ordinance and chose Option 2 which allowed for:
-
4 hens for a 10 foot setback from offsite residential buildings.
-
6 hens for a 15 foot setback from offsite residential buildings.
-
8 hens for a 20 foot setback from offsite residential buildings.
-
12 hens for a 30 foot setback from offsite residential buildings.
It was further explained that regardless of the option chosen, first reading of some clean-up ordinances would also be needed to make sure the Code was consistent with the inclusion of hens. (listed above under Subject).
At the October 21, 2020 City Council meeting, Council had Second Reading of various hen ordinances, which would become operable in 30 days (November 20, 2020).
On November 2, 2020, City received a letter from Channel Law Group, LLP, representing Citizens for the Preservation of R-1 Zones (Petitioners) indicating their intent to file a Writ of Mandate under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) alleging that the:
-
City failed to comply with CEQA when it adopted the ordinance allowing hens within areas of the City zoned as R-1, R-S, R-H and A zones.
-
Project is ineligible for both “common sense and the Information collection” exemptions.
-
City was required to conduct an environmental analysis prior to adopting the ordinance.
On November 16, 2020, Petitioners filed said CEQA lawsuit.
On November 17, 2020, City received an email Notice of Intent to File a Temporary Restraining Order/Preliminary Injunction (TRO) from the Petitioners. Petitioners requested a stipulation from the City in return for a waiver of costs and fees associated with successful TRO relief.
On November 18, 2020, Council directed the City Attorney to stipulate to the TRO agreeing that the hen ordinances would not go into effect until the matter was resolved.
On January 20, 2021, City and Petitioners participated in a mandated settlement conference. On the same day, during Closed Session, Council was presented with the Petitioners’ demands which were the following:
-
Rescind the various hen ordinances;
-
Conduct an appropriate environmental review without relying on exemption(s) if and when a new ordinance is pursued/adopted by the City; and
-
Pay $9,151.36 in attorneys fees
By a 6-1 vote, Council directed the City Attorney to place rescission of the hen ordinances on today’s Council agenda. If approved, the rescission will be immediate and City will enter into a settlement agreement with Petitioners which will include the items above in return for a dismissal of the CEQA lawsuit.