Sacramento Regional Coalition to End Homelessness et al v. City of Sacramento

Filing 36

CONSENT DECREE AND FINAL JUDGMENT signed by Senior Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 1/10/20. (Kaminski, H)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
SACRAMENTO DIVISION
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

SACRAMENTO REGIONAL COALITION ) Case No.: 2:18-cv-00878-MCE-AC
TO END HOMELESSNESS, JAMES LEE )
CLARK, AND SACRAMENTO
) CONSENT DECREE AND FINAL
HOMELESS ORGANIZING COMMITTEE, ) JUDGMENT
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
v.
)
)
)
CITY OF SACRAMENTO,
)
)
Defendant.
)
)
)

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
CONSENT DECREE AND FINAL JUDGMENT
CASE NO.: 2:18-CV-00878-MCE-AC

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

WHEREAS, on November 14, 2017, Defendant City of Sacramento
(“Defendant”) adopted an anti-solicitation ordinance, Ordinance 2017-0054
(“Ordinance”), which, among other things, made it a crime to engage in charitable
solicitation in a variety of public areas; and which was codified at Chapter 8.134 of the
Sacramento City Code.
WHEREAS, on April 10, 2018, Plaintiffs filed their Complaint for Declaratory and
Injunctive Relief (“Complaint”) in this Action (“Action”), ECF No. 1, alleging various
claims that the Ordinance violated the constitutional rights of people who solicit,
panhandle, or otherwise ask for immediate help or assistance in the City of Sacramento.
WHEREAS, on July 18, 2018, this Court granted Plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary
injunction in the Action, and entered its Order (“Order”), ECF No. 29, enjoining the
enforcement of the Ordinance.
WHEREAS, Defendant repealed the Ordinance on May 14, 2019.
WHEREAS, the Plaintiffs and Defendant (the “Parties”) agree that Plaintiffs’
commencement and prosecution of the Action was a material cause of the Court’s
issuance of the Order and Defendant’s subsequent repeal of the Ordinance, and of the
substantial change in the relationship between the Parties and the concrete relief
resulting therefrom.
WHEREAS, the Parties have conferred in good faith and have entered into a
Settlement Agreement, that, among other things, contemplates the entry of this Consent
Decree by the Court and the payment by Defendant to Plaintiffs of Plaintiffs’ attorneys’
fees and costs in an amount to be determined by the Court upon timely application by
Plaintiffs.
NOW, THEREFORE, upon the stipulation of the Parties, and good cause
appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED:
1.

Defendant, having repealed the Ordinance, will not seek to adopt an

ordinance that is substantially similar to the Ordinance or to Chapter 8.134 of the

28
CONSENT DECREE AND FINAL JUDGMENT
CASE NO.: 2:18-CV-00878-MCE-AC
1

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

Sacramento City Code to regulate the subject matters at issue in the Complaint.
Specifically, Defendant will not enact or seek to enforce an ordinance, rule or
regulations that seeks to prohibit or materially limit the ability of persons to solicit,
panhandle, or otherwise ask for immediate help or assistance
2.

Within 14 days of entry of judgment, Plaintiffs may file a bill of costs

pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54 and E.D. Cal. Civ. L.R. 292. Within 28 days after entry
of judgment, Plaintiffs may file a motion for an award of attorney’s fees pursuant to Fed.
R. Civ. P. 54 and E.D. Cal. Civ. L. R. 293.
3.

This action is hereby dismissed with prejudice, with the Court retaining

jurisdiction to enforce the terms of this Consent Decree and to award Plaintiffs
attorney’s fees and costs.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

13
14

Dated: January 10, 2020

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
CONSENT DECREE AND FINAL JUDGMENT
CASE NO.: 2:18-CV-00878-MCE-AC
2