No, it wasn’t. The City took 2 votes. First was a vote to accept the staff’s recommendation Planning Commission’s approval of the expansion and deny the appeal. It deadlocked 2-2.
Next, the Council took a vote to approve the appeal and deny the permit. It also deadlocked. 1/3
Then the City Attorney, who failed to correct GEO GC’s representation that GEO would consider indemnification (Negron himself told the City’s Attorney GEO wouldn’t foot the legal bills of the City in Feb 2019) decided unilaterally that the Planning Commission’s action stands. 2/3
That appears to be wrong for at least 2 reasons. 1. Once an appeal of an approved permit goes to the Council, Adelanto’s Code (Title 17) says “City Council SHALL BE THE FINAL APPROVAL AUTHORITY FOR ALL ACTIONS.” Planning Commish isn’t Council. So it lacks authority to approve 3/4
2. At least one California Court has held that a tie vote of a council on the appeal of a zoning/permit issue from the commission IS NOT ACTION. Saying the 2-2 deadlock means action was taken and the appeal failed so PC decision stands seems to conflict with black-letter law.
Yes: this is highly procedural & technical.
No: That doesn’t make it confusing or render the law unclear.
At stake here:
> A $2.1bn contract for GEO that assumes Adelanto would roll over and allow expansion.
> 1000s of detained migrants’ future
> 100s of GEO jobs
>#SB29
5/6
With this much at stake you’d think EVERYONE might have an interest in slowing down, understanding the law, and getting it right. 6/6.
Share this Scrolly Tale with your friends.
A Scrolly Tale is a new way to read Twitter threads with a more visually immersive experience.
Discover more beautiful Scrolly Tales like this.