2000 Municipal Code Ord 238 Relating to Limitations Period for ChallengingOLD BUSINESS
A. SECOND READING AND ADOPTION, OF ORDINANCE NO. 238. AN
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS RELATING TO THE
LIMITATIONS PERIOD FOR CHALLENGING THE ADMINISTRATIVE OR
QUASI-JUDICIAL ACTIONS OF THE CITY AND AMENDING THE ROLLING
HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE.
City Manager Nealis presented the staff report.
Mayor Pro Tem Murdock moved that the City Council waive further reading and adopt Ordinance
No. 238 relating to the limitations period for challenging the administrative or quasi-judicial actions
of the City and amending the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. Councilmember Pernell seconded the
motion which carried 3-0-2.
B. ORDINANCE NO. 238. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
RELATING TO THE LIMITATIONS PERIOD FOR CHALLENGING THE
ADMINISTRATIVE OR QUASI-JUDICIAL ACTIONS OF THE CITY AND
AMENDING THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE.
City Manager Nealis introduced Ordinance No. 238. In response to a request for more
background on this item, City Manager Nealis reported that the California Code of Civil Procedure
permits cities to impose shorter, uniform limits on the time in which a challenge to an
administrative or quasi-judicial decision must be brought. He also reported that the City Attorney
recommended that the City Council adopt Ordinance No. 238.
Councilmember Heinsheimer moved to waive further reading and introduce Ordinance No. 238
relating to, the limitations period for challenging the administrative or quasi-judicial actions of the
City and amending the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. Councilmember Pernell seconded the motion
which carried 5-0-0.
City f elfi,.y
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
Agenda Item No:. 6-A
Mtg. Date: 2/22/93
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: SECOND READING AND ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 238. AN
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS RELATING TO THE
LIMITATIONS PERIOD FOR CHALLENGING THE ADMINISTRATIVE
OR QUASI-JUDICIAL ACTIONS OF THE CITY AND AMENDING THE
ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE.
DATE: FEBRUARY 22, 1993
Ordinance No. 238 was introduced by members of the City Council at the regularly
scheduled meeting on February 8, 1993. It would be appropriate for the City Council to
waive further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 238.
CRN:mllc
corres.cm\ord238.sta
Printed on Recycled Paper.
ORDINANCE NO. 238
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
RELATING TO THE LIMITATIONS PERIOD FOR
CHALLENGING THE ADMINISTRATIVE OR QUASI-
JUDICIAL ACTIONS OF THE CITY AND AMENDING
THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
X81. Chapter 1.04 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code is hereby
amended by adding Section 1.04.075, to read as follows:
"1.04.075 Challenging the Administrative and Ouasi-Judicial Actions of the
City: Time In Which Actions Must Be Brought.
Any action challenging a final administrative order or decision by the
City made as a result of a proceeding in which by law a hearing is required
to be given, evidence is required to be taken, and discretion regarding a final
and non -appealable determination of facts is vested in the City of Rolling
Hills, or in any of its Boards, Commissions, officers or employees, must be
filed within the time limits set forth if California Code of Civil Procedure
Section 1094.6."
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 8th day of February, 1993.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
Deputy City Clerk
-1-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA . )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS )
I certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 238 entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
RELATING TO THE LIMITATIONS PERIOD FOR
CHALLENGING THE ADMINISTRATIVE OR QUASI-
JUDICIAL ACTIONS OF THE CITY AND' AMENDING
THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE
was passed and adopted by the Rolling Hills City Council February 8, 1993 by the following
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
and in compliance with the. laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices
Deputy City Clerk
-2-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss
I, DARRELL ESSEX, City Clerk of the City
of Cypress, California DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the
foregoing Ordinance was duly adopted at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cypress, held on the day
of , 1990, by the following roll
call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
CYPRESS
jec/ORD47811:vlk
CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF
-4-
ORDINANCE NO. 238
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
RELATING TO THE LIMITATIONS PERIOD FOR
CHALLENGING THE ADMINISTRATIVE OR QUASI-
JUDICIAL ACTIONS OF THE CITY AND AMENDING
THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Chapter 1.04 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code is hereby
amended by adding Section 1.04.075, to read as follows:
"1.04.075 Challenging the Administrative and Quasi -Judicial Actions of the
City: Time In Which Actions Must Be Brought.
Any action challenging a final administrative order or decision by the
City made as a result of a proceeding in which by law a hearing is required
to be given, evidence is required to be taken, and discretion regarding a final
and non -appealable determination of facts is vested in the City of Rolling
Hills, or in any of its Boards, Commissions, officers or employees, must be
filed within the time limits set forth in California Code of Civil Procedure
Section 1094.6."
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 8th day of February, 1993.
ATTEST:
K.��
Deputy City C erk
-1-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS )
I certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 238 entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
RELATING TO THE LIMITATIONS PERIOD FOR
CHALLENGING THE ADMINISTRATIVE OR QUASI-
JUDICIAL ACTIONS OF THE CITY. AND AMENDING
THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE.
was passed and adopted by the Rolling Hills City Council February 8, 1993 by the following
vote:
AYES: Councilmember Pernell, Mayor Pro.Tem Murdock and
Mayor Swanson.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Councilmembers Heinsheimer, and Leeuwenburgh.-
ABSTAIN: None.
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices
Deputy City erk
-2-
City ofieollinF ildro
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377.7288
Agenda Item No: 8-B
Mtg. Date: 2/8/93
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: ORDINANCE NO. 238. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING
HILLS RELATING TO THE LIMITATIONS PERIOD FOR CHALLENGING
THE ADMINISTRATIVE OR QUASI-JUDICIAL ACTIONS OF THE CITY
AND AMENDING THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE.
DATE: FEBRUARY 8, 1993
BACKGROUND
The California Code of Civil Procedure permits cities to impose shorter, uniform limits on
the time in which a challenge to an administrative or quasi-judicial decision must be
brought. This uniform 90 -day limitation period for such numerous limitations periods which
now apply to the City's decisions. At present, statute of limitations rage from 35 days to one
year or more.
To enjoy the benefit of this uniform and shorter limitations period, the City must enact
either a Resolution or Ordinance that adopts the 90 -day limitations period. We recommend
that the City adopt Ordinance in this case. In addition, the City must give notice to all
potential challengers of the shortened period in which actions may be brought against the
City.
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council waive further reading and introduce Ordinance No. 238.
CRN:nilk
corres.cm\ord238.sta
Printed on Recycled Paper.
d.r
ORDINANCE NO. 238
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
RELATING TO THE LIMITATIONS PERIOD FOR
CHALLENGING THE ADMINISTRATIVE OR QUASI-
JUDICIAL ACTIONS OF THE CITY AND AMENDING
THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Chapter 1.04 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code is hereby
amended by adding Section 1.04.075, to read as follows:
"1.04.075 Challenging the Administrative and Quasi -Judicial Actions of the
City: Time In Which Actions Must Be Brought.
Any action challenging a final administrative order or decision by the
City made as a result of a proceeding in which by law a hearing is required
to be given, evidence is required to be taken, and discretion regarding a final
and non -appealable determination of facts is vested in the City of Rolling
Hills, or in any of its Boards, Commissions, officers or employees, must be
filed within the time limits set forth if California Code of Civil Procedure
Section 1094.6."
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 8th day of February, 1993.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
Deputy City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA • )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS )
I certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 238 entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
RELATING. TO THE LIMITATIONS PERIOD FOR
CHALLENGING THE ADMINISTRATIVE OR QUASI-
JUDICIAL ACTIONS OF THE CITY AND AMENDING
THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE.
was passed and adopted by the Rolling Hills City Council February 8, 1993 by the following
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices
Deputy City Clerk
-2-
-4 IN
GLENN R. WATSON
ROBERT G. BEVERLY
HARRY L. GERSHON
DOUGLAS W. ARGUE
MARK L LAMKEN
ARNOLD SIMON
ERWIN E. ADLER
DAROLD D. PIEPER
FRED 4. FENSTER
ALLEN E. RENNETT
STEVEN L DORSEY
WILLIAM L STRAUSZ
ROBERT M. GOLDFRIED
ANTHONY B. DREWRY
MITCHELL E. ABBOTT
TIMOTHY L NEUFELD
ROBERT F. OE METER
GREGORY W. STEPANICICH
ROCHELLE BROWNE
DONALD STERN
MICHAEL JENKINS
WILUAM B. RUDELL
DAVID L COHEN
OUINN M. BARROW
CAROL W. LUNCH
COLEMAN J. WALSH, JR.
JOHN A. BELCHER
JEFFREY 4. RABIN
GREGORY M. KUNERT
SCOTT WEIBLE
THOMAS M. JIMBO
MICHELE BEAL BAGNERIS
WILLIAM K. KRAMER
CURTIS L. COLEMAN
STEVEN H. KAUFMANN
MARSHA JONES MOUTRIE
AMANDA F. SUSSKIND
WILLIAM E. MATSUMURA
ROBERT C. CECCON
PAMELA A. ALBERS
SAYRE WEAVER
KEVIN G. ENNIS
ROBIN D. HARRIS
MICHAEL ESTRADA
LAURENCE S. WIENER
DAVID P. WATTE
CHRISTI HOGIN
STEVEN R. ORR
DEBORAH R. HAKMAN
SCOTT K. SHINTANI
MICHAEL G. COLANTUONO
JACK S. SHOLKOFF
B. TILDEN KIM
DARYL T. TESHIMA
S. ALAN RAY
ROBIN D. WEINER
SASKIA T. ASAMURA
ADAM F. STREISAND
TAYLOR L FITZMAURICE
DAVID M. FLEISHMAN
KAYSER O. SUME
STEVEN L HOLCOMB
CRAIG A. STEELE
ROBERT M. MAHLOWITZ
KURTISS L GROSSMAN
MICHELLE A. CURTIS
DAWN R. ANDREWS
RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
January 19, 1993
CONFIDENTIAL
THIS MATERIAL IS SUBJECT TO
THE ATTORNEY -CLIENT AND/OR THE
ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT PRIVILEGES.
DO NOT DISCLOSE THE CONTENTS
HEREOF. DO NOT FILE WITH
PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE RECORDS.
Mr. Craig Nealis
City Manager
City of Rolling Hills
2 Portuguese Bend Road
Rolling Hills, California 90274
Re: Statute of Limitations
Decisions of the City
Dear Craig:
Ermavam
JAN 201993
CITY OURRDIftgaRAILLS
By
(1816-1888)
THIRTY-EIGHTH FLOOR
333 SOUTH HOPE STREET
LOS ANGELES. CAUFORNIA 90071-1469
(213) 626-8484
TELECOPIER (213) 626-0078
OF COUNSEL
RICHARD H. DINEL
1200110
OUR FILE NUMBER
R6980-00001
for Actions Challenging
Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6 permits the City
to adopt a uniform 90 -day statute of limitations for legal
challenges to decisions of the Planning Commission and City
Council. Along with the benefit to the City of uniformity in a
single statute of limitations period, the new time period is much
shorter than would otherwise apply in certain situations.
Currently, statute of limitations periods vary from 35 days under
CEQA to up to one year or more in other contexts.
We have drafted an ordinance for some of our' other
cities which, if adopted, would impose the 90 -day limit. I
thought that you might want to consider these materials for use
in Rolling Hills. Although Section 1094.6 allows the City the
option to adopt this shortened limitation period by ordinance or
by resolution, I recommend that the City act by ordinance in this
case. This revised period should be permanently memorialized in
the Municipal Code, so that it is clear and convenient to
reference. I also have included a draft staff report which you
may wish to use.
In order to secure the benefit of the shorter uniform
time limit, it will be critical that the City inform potential
challengers of the time within which they must contest decisions
of the City. A recent decision of the California Court of Appeal
held that if the City fails to provide notice of the shortened
.4, '
•
r
0
RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON
CONFIDENTIAL
Mr. Craig Nealis
January 19, 1993
Page 2
THIS MATERIAL IS SUBJECT TO THE ATTORNEY -CLIENT
AND/OR THE ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT PRIVILEGES.
DO NOT DISCLOSE THE CONTENTS HEREOF.
DO NOT FILE WITH PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE RECORDS.
limitations period to an applicant, the period never begins to
run and an appeal may be brought indefinitely.
Thus, if this proposed ordinance is adopted, the
following standard notice language should be incorporated into
every resolution that represents the final action by the City on
a particular matter:
"The time within which judicial review, if
available, of this decision must be sought is
governed by Section 1094.6 of the California
Code of Civil Procedure and Section 1.04.075
of the Municipal Code of the City of Rolling
Hills, unless a shorter time is provided by
other applicable law."
Please do not hesitate to call me if I can provide any
further information on this issue.
ery rul yours,
ch 1 e
CAS:lj
1200110