http://www.tinyurl.com/20110411

Officially San Diego has the worst public Infrastructure in American due to the massive amount of Water and Sewer Main breaks. No one seems to understand the relationship between San Diego’s failing public Infrastructure and the continuous creeping movement of the active Rose Canyon Fault Zone (RCFZ) which moves approximately one inch every 12 years.

http://dockets.sandiego.gov/sirepub/pubmtgframe.aspx?meetid=1390&doctype=Agenda

As seen on Monday January 31, 2012 City Council Closed Session Docket, there are at least 4 negligence lawsuits related to the claim that our public City Sewer system in the North Embarcadero along Pacific Highway is defective.

Conference with Legal Counsel – existing litigation, pursuant to California Government Code Section 54956.9(a):

CS-1 Park Place on Harbor Drive Owners Association v.
Bosa Development California, Inc., et al. San Diego Superior Court Case No. 37-2009-000099056-CU-CD-CTL (Lead Case). Consolidated with San Diego Superior Court Case No. 37-2010-00094666-CU-CD-CTL and San Diego Superior Court Case No. 37-2010-0099534-CU-PO-CTL). CDCA Assigned: C. Leone.

Plaintiff filed claims against the City stemming from a 36” main sewer line below Pacific Coast Highway which allegedly has created and continues to create damage by hydrogen sulfide gases from the sewer line into the project causing corrosion of plumbing lines and sewage backups. The City Attorney will update the Mayor and City Council on the status of the litigation.

CS-2 The Grande South at Santa Fe Place Homeowners Association v. Bosa Development California, Inc., et al. San Diego Superior Court Case No. 37-2009-00102606-CU-CD-CTL. CDCA Assigned: C. Leone.

Plaintiff filed claims against the City stemming from a 36” main sewer line below Pacific Coast Highway which allegedly has created and continues to create damage by hydrogen sulfide gases from the sewer line into the project causing corrosion of plumbing lines and sewage backups. The City Attorney will update the Mayor and City Council on the status of the litigation.

CCDC and the Redevelopment Agency (RDA) lamented that they wished State RDA law allowed them to use RDA Tax Increment (TI) to construct and maintain Homeless Emergency Shelters. Including paying for staff, water, electricity bills, to construct and MAINTAIN the Shelters for women, children, seniors, and the poor.

In reality CCDC could have use the 80 percent non-housing RDA TI all along, or since the 1980s at least. Up to $1 BILLION was withheld from the poor and Homeless due to made up lies. CCDC RDA deserved to die. Karma should treat CCDC staff the same way the treated poor seniors who were kicked out of their Single Room Occupancy (SRO) dumps, left on our sidewalks to die, all without financial help for relocation from CCDC as required under State law. However in the last 2 years CCDC did provide the required relocation and replacement housing for the poor and got serious about the Honeless in general. Great progress.

The State Departmemt of Housing and Community Development (HCD) told us CCDC RDA willful blindness to the allowable use of RDA TI for Homeless Emergency Shelter was used as a contributing reason to kill CCDC and RDAs state-wide. What kind of civic leaders steal money from the poor and Homeless?

This displays a fundamental misunderstanding of how Redevelopment worked and how the State Legislature requires it be wound down.

CCDC and SEDC were contract service providers to Redevelopment (RDA) under Operating Agreements.

On Jan 12, 2012 the City appointed itself the successor agency to the RDA under AB 26. That Bill requires that all current governance structure of the City, including CCDC and SEDC, remain the governance structure of the City in its capacity as the successor agency to the RDA until an oversight board, that must be in place by May 1, 2012, commences to oversee the actions and decisions of the successor agency.

AB 26 mandates that it be composed of seven members selected as follows:

(i) the county board of supervisors appoints two members, at least one of whom must be a member of the public;
(ii) the mayor for the city that created the former RDA appoints two members, one of whom will represent the former RDA’s employees, selected from the recognized employee organization representing the largest number of the former RDA’s employees employed by the successor agency at the time of appointment;
(iii) the largest special district, by property tax share, with territory in the former RDA’s territorial jurisdiction, appoints one member;
(iv) the county superintendent of education appoints one member to represent schools, unless the county superintendent is appointed, in which case the appointment is made by the county board of education.
(v) the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges appoints one member to represent community college districts in the county.

Dumanis writes: “I encourage the Mayor and City Council to ensure that the formation of the successor agency’s oversight board will include a diverse cross-section of city-wide stakeholders.

“That Board should include transit officials, housing advocates, representatives from downtown, the arts community and others. Input from all corners of our city is needed to assess current projects, address underdeveloped and underutilized areas of downtown and other redevelopment areas, and implement the city’s policies outlined by the City of San Diego’s Strategic Framework and the Economic Prosperity 2008 Policy.”

Which AB 26 did Bonnie read?