Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency v. Housing Authority of Contra Costa County et al

Filing 17

STIPULATION AND ORDER to Continue Case Management Conference. Initial Case Management Conference set for 2/6/2012 01:30 PM in Courtroom 12, 19th Floor, San Francisco. Signed by Judge Thelton E. Henderson on 01/10/2012. (tmi, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/11/2012)

1 SHARON L. ANDERSON (SBN 94814)
County Counsel
2 THOMAS L. GEIGER (SBN 199729)
Supervising Deputy County Counsel
3 RACHEL H. SOMMOVILLA (SBN 231529)
Deputy County Counsel
4 STEPHEN M. SIPTROTH (SBN 252792)
Deputy County Counsel
5 Contra Costa County
651 Pine St., 9th Floor
6 Martinez, CA 94553
Phone: [phone]
7 Facsimile: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
8
9 Attorneys for Plaintiff
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
10 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
11
12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

13

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

14
15

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, a public
body, corporate and politic,

Case No. C 11-03605 TEH
Assigned to: Judge Thelton E. Henderson

16
Plaintiff,
17

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

v.
18
19
20
21
22
23

ORDER (Proposed)
HOUSING AUTHORITY OF CONTRA
COSTA COUNTY, a political subdivision of
the State of California; UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT; and DOES ONE
THROUGH TWENTY, and all other persons
unknown claiming an interest in the property,

(Cal. Code Civ. Proc., § 1250.325)

Defendants.

24
25
26
27
28
Stipulation and Order to Continue Case Management Conference
Case No. C 11-03605 TEH

1

On December 29, 2011, the California Supreme Court issued its opinion in California

2 Redevelopment Assoc. v. Matosantos, California Supreme Court Case No. S194861. The
3 Matosantos decision largely upholds Assembly Bill 26, which dissolves redevelopment agencies
4 in California, and invalidates Assembly Bill 27 (both enacted as Stats. 2011 1st Ex. Session,
5 2011-2012, chapters 5-6), which would have provided redevelopment agencies a means of
6 continuing to exist in exchange for payments to the State of California. Pursuant to the
7 Matosantos decision, California redevelopment agencies will be dissolved, effective February 1,
8 2012, and the responsibility for winding up of the agencies’ obligations will be transferred to the
9 successor agency of each redevelopment agency, such as the city or county for which each
10 agency was formed.
11

Prior to the Matosantos decision, Plaintiff Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency

12 (“Redevelopment Agency”) intended to continue its redevelopment activities and projects
13 pursuant to Assembly Bill 27. In response to the Matosantos decision, Redevelopment Agency
14 staff and attorneys are working to determine how the effect of the decision will impact this
15 eminent domain action. Redevelopment Agency staff require additional time to address this
16 unforeseen outcome of the Matosantos case in order to meaningfully inform the Court of how
17 the Redevelopment Agency, or its successor agency, will proceed with this eminent domain
18
action. Plaintiff Redevelopment Agency and Defendant U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
19
Development (“Federal Defendant”) therefore request that the Court postpone the January 30,
20
2012 case management conference for an additional week pursuant to the parties’ stipulation.
21
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED and requested by Plaintiff Redevelopment Agency and
22
the Federal Defendant, through their respective undersigned attorneys, that the case management
23
conference now set for January 30, 2012 be continued for at least one week to allow time for the
24
Redevelopment Agency to assess the impact of the Matosantos decision on this eminent domain
25
action, thereby enabling the agency’s attorneys to advise the Court regarding how the agency or
26
its successor agency will proceed with this action.
27
///
28
Stipulation and Order to Continue Case Management Conference
Case No. C 11-03605 TEH

2

1

For the foregoing reasons, the parties respectfully request that the Court continue the

2 January 30, 2012 case management conference to February 6, 2012, or anytime thereafter.
3

Respectfully Submitted,

4 DATED: January 10, 2012

SHARON L. ANDERSON
County Counsel

5
6

__________/s/__________
Stephen M. Siptroth
Deputy County Counsel
Attorneys for Plaintiff Contra Costa County
Redevelopment Agency

7
8
9
10 DATED: January 10, 2012

MELINDA L. HAAG
United States Attorney

11
12

__________/s/__________
Charles M. O’Connor
Assistant United States Attorney
Attorneys for Defendant United States
Department of Housing and Urban
Development

13
14
15
16

19

6
1:30
continued to February ___, 2012, at ______ P.M. The parties shall file a joint case management
conference statement on or before January 30, 2012.

22

January 10
Dated: ___________________, 2012

UNIT
ED

21

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

RT
U
O

S

20

__________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Northern District of California

23

I:\CONDEMN\Active Condemnation Cases\CC Redev v HA\P010612 (Stip to Continue CMC).wpd

26

A

H

ER

LI

J

RT

25

NO

24

rson

. Hende

elton E
udge Th

R NIA

18

IT IS SO ORDERED. The case management conference in the above-captioned case is

FO

17

ORDER

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

27
28
Stipulation and Order to Continue Case Management Conference
Case No. C 11-03605 TEH

3