HomeMy WebLinkAboutCORRESPONDENCE - URGENCY ORDINANCE 1399 AND 1400Print Article: City holds special meeting to review TUSD building exemption Page 1 of 1
rr~$ osar~aB couN~rr
iT~~EGISTER
City holds special meeting to review TUSD building
exemption
By FRANK SITYONG
2011-0425 13:36:06
TUSTIN The City Council is holding a special meeting tonight at 7 to review a proposed urgency
ordinance that would eliminate along-standing exemption to the city's grading and excavation regulations.
If passed, the ordinance will affect construction at various Tustin Unified School District construction
projects, including the new sports gym at Tustin High School. School district construction projects have
typically been exempted from the city's grading regulations, according to a district press release.
School officials believe the move is part of a city campaign of retaliation against the school district that
began when the district declined to build a high school on a reserved site in the city's Tustin Legacy
development in 2008.
"The city has launched a sneak attack on TUSD knowing full well that our students, parents,
administrators, and staff would be out of town for the spring break holidays," said School Board president
Lynn Davis in a press release.
A staff report states that the schools must obtain a grading permit because the city entered into a
cooperative agreement with the Regional Water Quality Management board to enforce federal storm water
regulations in 2002. The city's proposed amendment repeals the part of the city code, which contains the
exemption that allowed the school district's projects to proceed without a grading permit.
"The adoption of this ordinance will only clarify the need of a grading permit and a Water Quality
Management plan and will improve water quality and the environment as a whole," reads a staff report.
The city began requiring that the school district obtain grading permits for construction projects in 2009,
and the school district then sued the city in February of 2010, claiming the city was delaying its projects
unnecessarily. The city immediately counter-sued to stop construction, and a trial was set for December
2010.
In December, the two parties agreed to a six-month continuance of the trial to pursue settlement
negotiations.
According to a school district press release, the negotiations were terminated on April 20.
The city and the school district have not responded to requests for comments at the time of publication.
®Copyright 2011 Freedom Communications. All Rights Reserved.
Privacy Policy I User Agreement I Site Mao
httn•//wane ncrPaictPr ~nm/cnmmnn/r~rinter/view nh»~~lh=ncreoicterR~irl=797RnFi 4/75/~nl 1
~~5~~~ o~afa,~E NEWS RELEASE
300 Soufh C Street, Tustin, CA 92780-3695 (714) 730-7339 FAX (714) 730-7436 www.tustin.k12.ca.us
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Apri123, 2011
CONTACT: Mark Eliot
Director of Communications
(714) 730-7339 meliot(a7,tustin.kl2.ca.us
City of Tustin Stops Lawsuit Settlement Negotiations
and Launches "Sneak Attack" on TUSD Construction Projects
Tustin, CA -The City of Tustin has terminated the lawsuit settlement negotiations with the Tustin
Unified School District (TUSD) and scheduled alast-minute "emergency" council meeting on Monday,
Apri125 (a school holiday) in an attempt to delay and disrupt school construction projects, including the
new gymnasium (Sports Pavilion) at Tustin High School. After three months of refusing to participate in
the settlement negotiation process, the City has declined to respond to the District's proposal and has
declared a halt to further negotiations.
"This is a desperate attempt to stave off defeat at the upcoming trial of the lawsuit between the City and
the District that is scheduled to start in just over a week on May 2," TUSD Board President Lynn Davis
said. "The City has suddenly declazed that, after nearly 50 years of expressly exempting public school
districts from obtaining a grading permit, a dire `emergency' supposedly exists that requires the City
to immediately repeal the school district exemption that has been part of the Tustin City Code since 1963
when the City adopted its first grading ordinance.
"We encourage everyone to voice their concerns and a-mail the Tustin City Council Members (go to
www.tustinca.or~ and click on City Council) or attend the City Council's special meeting on
Monday, April 25 at 7 p.m. or regular meeting on Tuesday, May 3 at 7 p.m. at City Hall, 300
Centennial Way." -Lynn Davis, President, TUSD Board of Education
"The City has launched a sneak attack on TUSD knowing full well that our students, pazents,
administrators and staff would be out of town for the Spring Break holidays. The City posted a notice late
Friday afternoon stating that it intended to hold a special meeting at 7 p.m. Monday. The purpose of the
meeting is to adopt an `emergency' ordinance to strip TUSD of its long-standing grading permit
exemption and to enact new storm water runoff requirements to prevent the District from building any
new school facilities without the City's permission," Davis stated. In the staff report accompanying the
notice, the City specifically identified the new gym currently under construction at Tustin High as one of
the projects that was being targeted by the emergency ordinance.
In February 2010, TUSD filed a complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief to stop the City of Tustin
from interfering with the District's efforts to make school improvements and build a new school to
accommodate its growing student population. The City then filed across-complaint against the District
and a trial was set for December 13.
-- more --
Lawsuit Negotiations & Sneak Attack -Page 2
Last December, TUSD agreed to a six-month continuance of the trial date to pursue settlement
negotiations with the City of Tustin. In January, District and City officials, including former City
Manager David Biggs, met to discuss a settlement. The City promised to forward a settlement protocol to
the District within the next two weeks. The District understood that the settlement protocol would include
a process by which the City would "review and approve" the District's grading plans on District
construction projects, and would not require the issuance of grading permits.
Despite numerous promises to release the settlement protocol, the City did not forward the "Settlement
Protocol" to TUSD. The District understands that the settlement protocol was being reviewed by a
special committee of the Tustin City Council consisting of Mayor Jerry Amante and Councilmember John
Nielson.
In March, TUSD's attorneys were advised by the City's attorneys that they were not authorized to release
the settlement protocol, and the parties will need to restart the litigation. The District continued to request
that the City release the settlement protocol, and engage in good faith settlement negotiations.
After three months from the promised delivery date, on April 8 the City sent its draft settlement protocol
and on April 14 the District forwazded its comments and revisions to the settlement protocol. On April
20, the City terminated settlement negotiations without commenting on the District's counterproposal.
As a result of the City's decision to terminate settlement negotiations, the District was left with no other
option but to proceed to trial to reach a resolution on the merits.
In addition, last week the City issued a list of objections to TUSD's grading plan and water quality
management plan (WQMP) for Tustin High's new gym in an attempt to hold up the grading for the new
gym building even though TUSD was not required under state law or the City Code to obtain a grading
permit. Recognizing that the City's own grading ordinance exempted TUSD from having to get a grading
permit from the City to proceed with the grading for the gym, the City then scheduled the emergency
meeting for Apri125 to repeal this exemption. Yet, in its attempt to work with the City, the District is in
the process of responding to the comments and will reply within the next week.
"The fact that the City is moving forward with such haste to repeal the exemption is not just to hinder
and delay the gym project; rather it is more of an attempt to prevent us from proving at the upcoming trial
that what we have been saying all along is true -that the District is exempt from obtaining a grading
permit under the City's own ordinance," Davis said. "If that is not true, then why is the City suddenly
trying to repeal that exemption on the very eve of trial?"
"What is truly regrettable is that, instead of making a good faith effort to negotiate a settlement with the
District and thereby avoid the time and expense of a court trial, the City has brazenly refused to even
respond to our settlement proposal and has unilaterally terminated settlement negotiations, deciding to
move ahead aggressively to enact an emergency ordinance to further oppose TUSD's efforts to renovate
Tustin High School and all future facility improvements at several school campuses throughout the City,"
Davis said.
Internal documents that the City was required to turn over in the litigation have revealed that City
officials were angry when TUSD did not agree to the City's plan to close Tustin High School and build a
new high school on the Tustin Marine Base. At the time in 2008, the City demanded that TUSD sign a
200-page contract agreeing to build a new high school as part of the Tustin Legacy project on the base
-- more --
Lawsuit Negotiations & Sneak Attack -Page 3
within five years. "There was no financing for such an outlandish scheme and, fortunately, TUSD
rejected the City's proposal because the District could have potentially faced bankruptcy today," Davis
said.
"However, certain City Council members were very upset that TUSD would not agree to mothball Tustin
High and so they helped fund efforts to block the passage of Measure L that was designed to raise funds
to help renovate Tustin High at a fraction of the cost of building a new high school," Davis added.
"'The City of Tustin's ongoing frustration and resentment over TUSD's refusal to go along with the City's
plan to shutter Tustin High and sell off the land to real estate developers which would have provided only
partial funding to build a new high school on the former marine base is what led to the City's sudden
decision in 2009 to reverse almost 50 years of precedent and to start demanding that TUSD obtain grading
permits from the City for all of its school construction projects," Davis said.
"In short, the City was exacting retribution when it tried in 2009 to stop the Heritage School project from
being built on a site other than the one that the City felt would better promote the success of the Tustin
Legacy project. Likewise, the City's attempts in 2009 to halt the construction of the new Science Center
and Plaza project at Tustin High were designed to punish TUSD for successfully gaining passage of
Measure L to renovate Tustin High," Davis stated.
"In its nearly 40-year history, the Tustin Unified School District has spent hundreds of millions of dollazs
building dozens of award-winning schools without the City of Tustin ever requiring grading permits
before now," Davis said. "Previously, Tustin followed the same procedures we still use successfully
today with the City of Irvine and County officials in the unincorporated area. The City of Tustin's
unprecedented demands have caused needless delays and higher costs to taxpayers," he added.
"The last thing we wanted to do was file a lawsuit, but we needed to protect our rights," Davis said. "All
we want to do is improve our schools so our students can continue to achieve scholastic excellence. Our
residents want and deserve to have these state-of--the-art schools and campus modernization projects."
The Tustin Unified School District has always had state approvals, environmental permits and financing
needed to begin its school improvement projects, yet the City now insists that the school district comply
with an additional layer of municipal red tape and bureaucratic regulations that do not apply to schools
because they are regulated by the state.
The voters of Tustin twice approved bond measures to provide TUSD the resources needed to implement
improvements to the schools such as amuch-needed new state-of--the-art science center and sports
pavilion at Tustin High School. TUSD has also been building Heritage School located on a 10-acre site
that the District owns in the northwest corner of the former Tustin Marine Corps Air Station.
Construction of similar science buildings at Foothill High and Beckman High, other projects and building
of new schools have proceeded within the portions of TUSD that are in the unincorporated Orange
County area and in the City of Irvine in cooperation with those municipalities and with none of the red
tape and bureaucratic demands being made by the City of Tustin.
###
>-
> *From:* dwaldram@gmail.com [mailto:dwaldram@gmail.comi *On Behalf Of
> *David Waldram for City Councfl
> *Sent:* Saturday, April 23, 201110:09 PM
> *To:* undisclosed-recipients:
> *Subject:* URGENT! FW: Tustin High Supporters Needed At Emergency
> Council Meeting THIS Monday, 7 pm!
> Greetings, friends,
> I received this email today regarding the latest affront on our
> schools by members of our City Council. Please read the information
> below and forward this to your friends and invite them to join us
> Monday as we let our City Council know we do not approve of these
> purposed changes to the Grading Ordinance. There is a right way and a
> wrong way, and we need to let our City Council members know that what
> is being purposed is most definitely wrong for Tustin!
> -David Waldram
> (PLEASE DO READ THIS IMPORTANT INFORMATION)
> Today, Friday, April 22, 2011, the City of Tustin posted notice on
> their web site of an emergency City Council meeting for THIS COMING
> MONDAY, April 25 at 7 pm at Council Chambers at 300 Centennial Way in
> Tustin.
> We need every supporter of the Tustin High School construction
> projects (THS Science Center, Quad and new Sports Pavilion) to attend
> and OPPOSE two proposed grading ordinances that will add requirements
> to the 50 year old Grading Ordinance intended to delay, interfere with
> and add substantial costs to these projects.
> *PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND ASK THEM TO OPPOSE THESE
> NEW ORDINANCES!
> Emails: Deborah Gavello <**deborah@deborahfortustin.com
> <mailto:deborah@deborahfortustin.com>**>, Beckfe Gomez McKeon
> <rebgomez@aol.com <mailto:rebgomez@aol.com», AI Murray
> <mrharl~yd@cox.net <maiito:mrharleyd@cox.net», John Nielsen
> <jnie11225@aol.com <mailto:jnie11225@aol.com»
>*
> (Mayor Amante's email is not listed here, because he is clearly the
> instigator of this covert effort to hinder school construction
> projects.)
> *PLEASE ASK YOUR FRIENDS TO JOIN YOU AT THE MEETING AND ALSO ASK
> COUNCIL MEMBERS TO VOTE AGAINST THESE PROPOSALS!
> Please forward this email to as many people as you can! To keep up to
> date, track htt~/fwww.LynnDavis.or~ and/or
> httn://www.Sto~TheRedTaae.com (Updates will be posted starting
> Saturday morning, April 23.)
> BACKGROUND:
>*
> 1. About 50 years ago, the City of Tustin adopted its Grading
> Ordinance. Both Tustin and Irvine modeled their Grading Ordinances on
> the County Grading Ordinances, and ALL THREE contained a specific
> exemption that kept public school districts from having to get Grading
> Permits, since school construction is regulated, approved and
> inspected by State authorities (particularly the Division of the State
> Architect).
> 2. Unti12009, all Tustin Unified School District grading plans were
> informally reviewed and approved by the relevant municipality in all
> parts of TUSD. But in 2009, the City of Tustin insisted - alone and
> for the first time = that TUSD projects, including those at Tustin
> High, needed to meet additional requirements, pay substantial
> additional fees, and be subject to additional costly inspections from
> City bureaucrats.
> 3r to early 2010, facing the loss of millions of dollars in savings
> on attractive bids, ten acres of federal land, and other potential
> penalties, TUSD asked the County Superior Court to stop City
> interference in its projects, and proceeded with several construction
> projects, saving several millions of taxpayer dollars. The City in
> turn asked the Court to stop these projects and give the City
> substantial control over them.
> 4. In December 2010, just before the question was to go before a
> judge, the City of Tustin requested that TUSD agree to a six month
> extension of the court hearing to engage in settlement discussions.
> TUSD agreed.
> 5. In January 2011, substantial agreement was reached on several key
> points of a settlement between City and School District officials. A
> draft of the agreement was to be created by the City and provided to
> TUSD by early February.
> 6. On April 8, after several requests, the City of Tustin finally
> provided a draft settlement agreement to TUSD. It in no way resembled
> what had been discussed. In an attempt to keep the public from ever
> finding out what was REALLY happening, Amante sought to impose a "gag
> order" on all elected officials involved, preventing them from giving
> anyone in the public any information other than what would be in a
> sanitized press release approved by both sides' lawyers. Penalty for
> violation of the gag order was set at $250,000 or higher! This is
> unprecedented in settlements of disputes between public agencies.
> 7. On April 14, TUSD provided to the City a settlement proposal that
> would save both sides countless of dollars of taxpayer funded legal fees.
> 8. On April 20, less than two weeks before the postponed court date,
> the City of Tustin legal counsel informed TUSD that the City *refused
> to respond* to the TUSD offer, and was unilaterally ending settlement
> talks.
> 9. On April 22, the City of Tustin posted notice of an EMERGENCY
> COUNCIL MEETING to be held on Monday, Apri125 at 5:30 (closed
> session) and 7 pm (open session) at which it would *unilaterally amend
> the 50 year old Grading Code so it could for the first time eliminate
> the public school exemptions
> Meanwhile, equivalent construction projects continue at TUSD schools
> in the City of Irvine (e.g. Beckman, Orchard Hills, Hicks Canyon) and
> in the unincorporated County area (e.g. Foothill) with the exemption
> being honored and NO resulting problems!
> The proposed new City ordinances would needlessly delay projects and
> be very costly to area taxpayers, who have twice voted to fund these
> important school construction protects with large supermajority votes!
> Amazingly, all FOUR of the City Council members listed above attended
> the ground-breaking ceremony for the THS Sports Pavilion project that
> the City now proposes to interfere with by stripping the TUSD
> exemptions and more on Monday night.
> Both in terms of the Tustin High construction projects, which City
> officials well knew were underway, and in terms of the Court date now
> scheduled for Monday, May 2nd, these are LAST MINUTE DESPARATION MOVES
> by Amante and City bureaucrats to change the rules AFTER the game is
> underway!
> Not only that, choosing to use SPRING BREAK WEEK to cut off
> negotiations and EASTER WEEKEND to call a LAST MINUTE emergency
> Council meeting clearly demonstrate an intent to engage in a sneak
> attack at a time they hope that Tustln's students and parents will not
> notice and object to what they are doing!
> Please do the following:
>*
> 1. *EMAIL the four City Council members stating your STRONG
> objection to any last minute, costly changes in grading
> ordinances applicable to school construction projects!
> 2. *COME on Monday to the Emergency City Council meeting by 6 pm on
> Monday, April 25 at the City Council chambers.
> 3. *EMAIL YOUR FRIENDS AND ASK THEM TO JOIN YOU IN TAKING THE ABOVE
> TWO ACTIONS!
>*
> THANK YOU for your consistent support of these necessary improvements
> to our high quality neighborhood schools here in Tustinl
> Sincerely,
> Lynn Davis, President
> Tustin Board of Education
>*
From: Lynn Davis jmailto:redhilldavisCa~earthlink.netl
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2011 11:17 PM
To: deborahCa~deborahfortustin~com
Subject: URGENT! FW: Tustin High Supporters Needed At Emergency Council Meeting THIS Monday, 7
pm!
Importance: High
Deborah Gavello has requested that citizens with concerns about the proposed grading
ordinance changes contact her at her web site email address, which is
deborah(c~deborahfortustin.com -rather than the one listed initially.
That is deborahCi)deborahfortustin.com
If you have forwarded the original message to others, please inform them of this as well.
Thank you for expressing your support for schools!
Lynn Davis
------ Forwarded Message
From: Lynn Davis <redhilldavis@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 21:29:59 -0700
To:
Conversation: Tustin High Supporters Needed At Emergency Council Meeting THIS Monday, 7 pm!
Subject: Tustin High Supporters Needed At Emergency Council Meeting THIS Monday, 7 pm!
Today, Friday, April 22, 2011, the City of Tustin posted notice on their web site of an emergency City
Council meeting for THIS COMING MONDAY, April 25 at 7 pm at Council Chambers at 300 Centennial
Way in Tustin.
We need every supporter of the Tustin High School construction projects (THS Science Center, Quad
and new Sports Pavilion) to attend and OPPOSE two proposed grading ordinances that will add
requirements to the 50 year old Grading Ordinance intended to delay, interfere with and add
substantial costs to these projects.
PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND ASK THEM TO OPPOSE THESE NEW
ORDINANCES!
Emails: Deborah Gavello <deborahgavelloCcdmac.com>, Beckie Gomez McKeon
<rebaomez~aol.com>, AI Murray <mrharleyd~dcox.net>, ]ohn Nielsen
<jnie11225Csdaol.com> (If you get the first edition of this email, you can just hit "REPLY
ALL" to tell them what you think!)
(Mayor Amante's email is not listed here, because he is clearly the instigator of this covert effort to
hinder school construction projects.)
PLEASE ASK YOUR FRIENDS TO ]OIN YOU AT THE MEETING AND ALSO ASK COUNCIL
MEMBERS TO VOTE AGAINST THESE PROPOSALS!
Please forward this email to as many people as you cans To keep up to date, track
httn://www.LynnDavis.ora and/or httu://www.StooTheRedTaoe.com (Updates will be
posted starting Saturday morning, April 23.)
BACKGROUND:
1. About 50 years ago, the City of Tustin adopted its Grading Ordinance. Both Tustin and Irvine
modeled their Grading Ordinances on the County Grading Ordinances, and ALL THREE contained a
specific exemption that kept public school districts from having to get Grading Permits, since school
construction is regulated, approved and inspected by State authorities (particularly the Division of the
State Architect).
2. Until 2009, all Tustin Unified School District grading plans were informally reviewed and approved
by the relevant municipality in all parts of TUSD. But in 2009, the City of Tustin insisted -alone and
for the first time -that TUSD projects, including those at Tustin H1gh, needed to meet additional
requirements, pay substantial additional fees, and be subject to additional costly inspections from City
bureaucrats.
3. In early 2010, facing the loss of millions of dollars in savings on attractive bids, ten acres of federal
land, and other potential penalties, TUSD asked the County Superior Court to stop City interference in
its projects, and proceeded with several construction projects, saving several millions of taxpayer
dollars. The City in turn asked the Court to stop these projects and give the City substantial control
over them.
4. In December 2010, just before the question was to go before a judge, the City of Tustin requested
that TUSD agree to a six month extension of the court hearing to engage in settlement discussions.
TUSD agreed.
5. In January 2011, substantial agreement was reached on several key points of a settlement
between City and School District officials. A draft of the agreement was to be created by the City and
provided to TUSD by early February.
6. On April 8, after several requests, the City of Tustin finally provided a draft settlement agreement
to TUSD. It in no way resembled what had been discussed. In an attempt to keep the public from
ever finding out what was REALLY happening, Amante sought to impose a "gag order" on all elected
officials involved, preventing them from giving anyone in the public any information other than what
would be in a sanitized press release approved by both sides' lawyers. Penalty for violation of the gag
order was set at $250,000 or higher! This is unprecedented in settlements of disputes between public
agencies.
7. On April 14, TUSD provided to the City a settlement proposal that would save both sides countless
of dollars of taxpayer funded legal fees.
8. On April 20, less than two weeks before the postponed court date, the City of Tustin legal counsel
informed TUSD that the City refused to respond to the TUSD offer, and was unilaterally ending
settlement talks.
9. On April 22, the City of Tustin posted notice of an EMERGENCY COUNCIL MEETING to be held on
Monday, April 25 at 5:30 (closed session) and 7 pm (open session) at which it would unilaterally
amend the 50 year old Grading Code so it could for the first time eliminate the public school
exemption!
Meanwhile, equivalent construction projects continue at TUSD schools in the City of Irvine
(e.g. Beckman, Orchard Hills, Hicks Canyon) and in the unincorporated County area (e.g.
Foothill) with the exemption being honored and NO resulting problemsl~
The proposed new City ordinances would needlessly delay projects and be very costly to
area taxpayers, who have twice voted to fund these important school construction projects
with large supermajority votes!
Amazingly, all FOUR of the City Council members listed above attended the ground-breaking
ceremony for the THS Sports Pavilion project that the City now proposes to interfere with
by stripping the TUSD exemptions and more on Monday night.
Both in terms of the Tustin High construction projects, which City officials well knew were
underway, and in terms of the Court date now scheduled for Monday, May 2nd, these are
LAST MINUTE DESPARATION MOVES by Amante and City bureaucrats to change the rules
AFTER the game is underway!
Not only that, choosing to use SPRING BREAK WEEK to cut off negotiations and EASTER
WEEKEND to call a LAST MINUTE emergency Council meeting clearly demonstrate an intent
to engage in a sneak attack at a time they hope that Tustin's students and parents will not
notice and object to what they are doing!
Please do the following:
1. EMAIL the four City Council members stating your STRONG objection to any last
minute, costly changes in grading ordinances applicable to school construction
projects!
2. COME on Monday to the Emergency City Council meeting by 6 pm on Monday, April
25 at the City Council chambers.
3. EMAIL YOUR FRIENDS AND ASK THEM TO JOIN YOU IN TAKING THE ABOVE TWO
ACTIONS!
THANK YOU for your consistent support of these necessary improvements to our high
quality neighborhood schools .here in Tustinl
Sincerely,
Lynn Davis, President
Tustin Board of Education
714-665-9591
httn: / /www.lynndavis.ora
2.
------ End of Forwarded Message
From: Lynn Davis [mailto:redhilldavisCc~earthlink.ne~
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2011 9:30 PM
To: Deborah Gavello; Beckie Gomez McKeon; A) Murray; John Nielsen
Subject: Tustin High Supporters Needed At Emergency Council Meeting THIS Monday, 7 pm!
Importance: High
Today, Friday, April 22, 2011, the City of Tustin posted notice on their web site of an emergency City
Council meeting for THIS COMING MONDAY, April 25 at 7 pm at Council Chambers at 300 Centennial
Way in Tustin.
We need every supporter of the Tustin High School construction projects (THS Science Center, Quad
and new Sports Pavilion) to attend and OPPOSE two proposed grading ordinances that will add
requirements to the 50 year old Grading Ordinance intended to delay, interfere with and add
substantial costs to these projects.
PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND ASK THEM TO OPPOSE THESE NEW
ORDINANCESI
Emails: Deborah Gaveilo <deborahgavello®mac.com>, Beckie Gomez McKeon
<rebaomaz®aoi.com>, AI Murray <mrharleyd®cox.nat>, ]ohn Nielsen
<jnie11225maol.com> (If you get the first edition of this email, you can just hit "REPLY
ALL" to tell them what you think!)
(Mayor Amante's email is not listed here, because he is clearly the instigator of this covert effort to
hinder school construction projects.)
PLEASE ASK YOUR FRIENDS TO ]OIN YOU AT THE MEETING AND ALSO ASK COUNCIL
MEMBERS TO VOTE AGAINST THESE PROPOSALS!
Please forward this email to as many people as you cans To keep up to date, track
httn://www.LynnDavis.ora and/or htto://www.StonTheRedTaoe.com (Updates will be
posted starting Saturday morning, April 23.)
BACKGROUND:
1. About 50 years ago, the City of Tustin adopted its Grading Ordinance. Both Tustin and Irvine
modeled their Grading Ordinances on the County Grading Ordinances, and ALL THREE contained a
specific exemption that kept public school districts from having to get Grading Permits, since school
construction is regulated, approved and inspected by State authorities (particularly the Division of the
State Architect).
2. Until 2009, all Tustin Unified School District grading plans were informally reviewed and approved
by the relevant municipality in all parts of TUSD. But in 2009, the City of Tustin insisted -alone and
for the first time -that TUSD projects, including those at Tustin High, needed to meet additional
requirements, pay substantial additional fees, and be subject to additional costly inspections from City
bureaucrats.
3. In early 2010, facing the loss of millions of dollars in savings on attractive bids, ten acres of federal
land, and other potential penalties, TUSD asked the County Superior Court to stop City interference in
its projects, and proceeded with several construction projects, saving several millions of taxpayer
dollars. The City in turn asked the Court to stop these projects and give the City substantial control
over them.
4. In December 2010, just before the question was to go before a judge, the City of Tustin requested
that TUSD agree to a six month extension of the court hearing to engage in settlement discussions.
TUSD agreed.
5. In January 2011, substantial agreement was reached on several key points of a settlement
between City and School District officials. A draft of the agreement was to be created by the CIty and
provided to TUSD by early February.
6. On April 8, after several requests, the City of Tustin finally provided a draft settlement agreement
to TUSD. It in no way resembled what had been discussed. In an attempt to keep the public from
ever finding out what was REALLY happening, Amante sought to impose a "gag order" on all elected
officials involved, preventing them from giving anyone in the public any information other than what
would be in a sanitized press release approved by both sides' lawyers. Penalty for violation of the gag
order was set at $250,000 or higher! This is unprecedented in settlements of disputes between public
agencies.
7. On April 14, TUSD provided to the City a settlement proposal that would save both sides countless
of dollars of taxpayer funded legal fees.
8. On April 20, less than two weeks before the postponed court date, the City of Tustin legal counsel
informed TUSD that the City refused to respond to the TUSD offer, and was unilaterally ending
settlement talks.
9. On April 22, the City of Tustin posted notice of an EMERGENCY COUNCIL MEETING to be held on
Monday, April 25 at 5:30 (closed session) and 7 pm (open session) at which it would unilaterally
amend the 50 year old Grading Code so it could for the first tlme eBminate the public school
exemption!
Meanwhile, equivalent construction projects contlnue at TUSD schools in the Ctty of Irvine
(e.g. Beckman, Orchard Hills, Hicks Canyon) and in the unincorporated County area (e.g.
Foothill) with the exemption being honored and NO resultlng problems!
The proposed new City ordinances would needlessly delay projects and be very costly to
area taxpayers, who have twice voted to fund these important school construction projects
with large supermajority votes!
Amazingly, all FOUR of the City Council members listed above attended the ground-breaking
ceremony for the THS Sports Pavilion project that the City now proposes to interfere with
by stripping the TUSD exemptions and more on Monday night.
Both in terms of the Tustln High construction projects, which Ctty offlcials well knew were
underway, and in terms of the Court date now scheduled for Monday, May 2nd, these are
LAST MINUTE DESPARATION MOVES by Amante and City bureaucrats to change the rules
AFTER the game is underway)
Not only that, choosing to use SPRING BREAK WEEK to cut off negotlations and EASTER
WEEKEND to caN a LAST MINUTE emergency Council meeting clearly demonstrate an intent
to engage in a sneak attack at a time they hope that Tustin's students and parents will not
notice and object to what they are doing)
Please do the following:
1. EMAIL the four City Council members stating your STRONG objection to any last
minute, costly changes in grading ordinances applicable to school construction
projects!
2. COME on Monday to the Emergency City Council meeting by 6 pm on Monday, April
25 at the City Council chambers.
3. EMAIL YOUR FRIENDS AND ASK THEM TO )OIN YOU IN TAKING THE ABOVE TWO
ACTIONS!
THANK YOU for your consistent support of these necessary Improvements to our high
quality neighborhood schools here in Tustin)
Sincerely,
Lynn Davts, President
Tustin Board of Education
714-665-9591
htto: / /www.lvnndavis.ora
2.
Amante, Jerry
From: Deb Jacobson [debj@calevents.comj
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2011 12:36 PM
To: Amante, Jeny
Subject: Grading Ordinance Change and THS
Really. Once again, your council has found some reason to interfere with the Tustin High School Upgrade projects
which were voted on and passed by the constituents of the entire city of Tustin. I realize that our demographics are
not what you deem as important enough for your attention, but we also have a voice here. It amazes me that a 50
year old ordinance is not good enough for you now and also that you thought it was necessary to hold a meeting
during the spring break when you thought no one would be paying attention. It also amazes me that meanwhile,
equivalent construction projects continue at TUSD schools in the City of Irvine (e.g. Beckman, Orchard
Hills, Hicks Canyon) and in the unincorporated County area (e.g. Foothill) with the grading exemption
being honored and NO resulting problems) My husband and I work hard for our money and pay taxes just like
everyone else in Tustin. We may not live on top of a hill, or have our children attend a school that can raise
thousands of dollars in one night to fund a sports or cheer program, but we do deserve to have our children attend a
school that can focus on teaching and not battling a city council on ridiculous, and what should be non-existent
problems.
Thank you for costing me more money than I can afford in extra taxes and fees and for affecting my children's
education. Also, thank you for attending the ground breaking ceremony for the THS Sports Pavilion and now delaying
it as long as possible and maybe stopping it. Pretty impressive. Thank goodness those other schools will get their
building done.
I will not be voting for you at the next election and will be sure to recommend that my friends, family, colleagues
don't either until you can show me that you can represent the entire city and not just a small portion of it.
Debra Jacobson
Tustin City Council
From: wgribble [wgribble@ieee.org]
Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2011 6:46 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL
Subject: School grading permits
I have just received an email from Lynn Davis, President of the Tustin Board of Education
regarding grading permits for school construction.
Although there are always two sides to an issue, the City in scheduling a meeting on Friday
for the following Monday after Easter certainly leaves one questioning the motives of the
City. I hope that you will take time to carefully consider the issue of grading permits for
schools being sure that this is not just a way of creating additional funds for the Building
Department.
It is hard to see the urgency to resolve this matter when, for 50 years, the present system
has worked satisfactorily.
Tustin City Council
From: John Norment Qnorm77@msn.com]
Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2011 4:37 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL
Subject: STRONG objection to any last minute, costly changes in grading ordinances applicable to
school construction projects!
I wish to let you know that I have a STRONG objection to any last minute, costly changes in grading ordinances
applicable to school construction projects!
And more importantly, I wish you to know I have STRONG Objection to the appearance that Tustin is trying to hide what
they are doing from taxpayers.
John Norment
North Tufsin Resident
Tustin City Council
From: Steve Dempster [steve.dempster@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2011 2:23 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL
Subject: Grading Permits for TUSD -Special Meeting-Council Members' Integrity at Stake
To the esteemed members of the Tustin City Council,
I have been made aware of litigation, negotiations and the breakdown of negotiations
between the City Council and the TUSD as of last week regarding the desire of you all to
require grading permits for TUSD when the current City ordinance has not done so for
50 years.
Why now?
It troubles me to think this is about POWER and CONTROL and money, as in who
stands to gain by this ceasing of negotiations and hasty repeal of the no-
grading-permit-required for TUSD.
This smells of something other than serving the public good.
Admitedly I do not have the whole picture, but ON PRINCIPLE The City Council needs to
handle all of its' affairs (our city's affairs in a professional manner that sets an example
for the citizens of Tustin. Holding a hasty meeting to get around the negotiations does
not appear to be above board. How do you justify your actions to your children?
Please return to negotiations. This vote on Monday to repeal the no-grading permit-
required ordinance is not in the city's best interest nor is it in your best interest if you
truely intend to portray Tustin a great place to raise a family and anchor a business.
Sincerely,
Steve Dempster
10 year Tustin resident
i
Tustin City Council
From: Christopher kiehler@tjx.com
Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2011 6:18 PM
To: deborah@deborahfortustin.com; rebgomez@aol.com; mrharleyd@cox.net; jnie11225
@aol.com; CITY COUNCIL
Subject: Emergency City Council Meeting
Wow, some of you people are really dirty! Why in the world would you call an "Emergency Meeting" on April 22 for April
25? Oh maybe it is to cram a dirty issue through when no one is looking? There is nothing "Emergency" in this, other
than a blatant attempt to try and secure funds and help boost your law suit with TUSD.
You should be ashamed of yourselves. If this is worth doing, it is worth disclosing openly to your constituents. With the
atrocities of the City of Bell Council, and the criminal prosecution going on there, it would seem that a much more
transparent approach would be used. But no, apparently, deceit and deception are easier than straightforward honesty.
I will be in attendance Monday to watch and listen.
Shame on you!
Chris Kiehler
Tustin Citv Council
From: enderleQenderlecenter.com
Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2011 5:25 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL
Subject: [FWD: Change is city policy regarding Tustin High School]
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Change is city policy regarding Tustin High School
From: <enderle@enderlecenter.com>
Date: Sat, April 23, 2011 5:20 pm
To: CityCouncil@tustinca.org
I do not have all of your email addresses or I would have addressed all of you individually. Jerry,
you may recall my discussing the matter personally with you as I also have done with Dick Bray.
You all may recall the old saying, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
We know that many school districts, including Tustin and Irvine, used the County of Orange
Grading Ordinance for their model. It is a practical, cost effective, method that has worked well
for a lot of years.
Most of us also know that the state not only inspects the construction but that a representative
from the state is on site during construction to make sure the school is built according to the
plans. This singular fact makes school districts unique.
I respect all of you and I choose to believe that you have both the city's and the schools' best
interest at heart.
While it may take old fashioned "guts" to say, "Let's drop the whole matter and let what has
worked for upwards of 50 years continue to work." Just do it.
May God guide your decision regarding this issue!
Your friend, AI Enderle
PS: I will be out of town Monday evening otherwise I would attend your meeting.
Tustin City Council
From: Don Berkheimer [berkheim@pacbell.net]
Sent: Saturday, Apri123, 2011 11:38 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL
Cc: Idavis@tustin.k12.ca.us; jabelove@tustin.kl2.ca.gov; tbullard@tustin.k12.ca.gov;
jlaird@tustin.k12.ca.gov; fscinto@tustin.k12.ca.gov; rbray@tustin.k12.ca.gov
Subject: Proposed Ordinance 1399 and 1400
To the city council
I have read the proposed Ordinance 1399 and 1400 and offer the following comments:
1. Why are we spending taxpayer money for this "whole stupid° lawsuit and discussion?
Remember we the taxpayer are paying for both sides and are gaining nothing.
2. Why do we need these ordinances? Is the city about to lose the lawsuit? That is how is
appears. We are going to change the law so that we can win the lawsuit. And we are adding
an issue to litigate. Think "ex post facto"
3. If the real issue is the Water quality and erosion control then,
a. Let's get the politics out of the problem. Let's put a senior planner and an architect from
the school district side in a room and tell them to solve the problem with the least amount of
drawing changes and least amount of "bull shit" (forgive the expression).
b. If there is a document approved by the state or another agency lets use it. We do not need
to redraw it to meet Tustin specifications. If the intent of the drawing needs to be changed
that is another problem. Items like specifying Tustin's permit number on all plans just cost
money.
c. If there is a legitimate concern then ask for the existing drawing to be changed to the
minimum extent necessary to accommodate the problem. Do not ask for a new drawing.
d. These two or three people need to be given the latitude to solve the problem and told to do
it with the minimum effort necessary.
4. Let's agree that he planning fee for the effort no matter how long it takes is $2,000. That
eliminates the City's need to elongate the process to make more money and since it is "my"
money this appears to be reasonable.
Please explain why this cannot be solved with rational discussion with the people that have the
knowledge and no political agenda involved. Maybe there can be a citizen to sit with the
knowledgeable people (i.e. the planner and the architect, not the politicians) and help guide the
solution.
Maybe this should be the first item for the new city manager (yet to be hired) and the new
superintendent Qust hired) to address. That is if we can wait to address the issue.
I suggest that all documents relating to this matter be posted on both the City Website and the District
Website so that both sides have an incentive to be transparent.
Thank you for your time,
Don Berkheimer
Donald G. Berkheimer CPA
2362 Sable Tree Circle
Tustin, CA 92780-7125
714-838-3688
FAX 714-482-4400
berkhei m @ pacbel I. net