75D - PH - ACQUISITION 1922 AND 2002 W 5TH ST

Home Browse Search

JUN -01-2017 04:16PM From:PTw 9497940725 To:17146476956 Paee:5/6 PALMIERI TYLER City of Santa Ana June 1, 2017 Page 4 Yet, notice was not provided to our office or our client by the City. The only conclusion that can be drawn for the lack of notice is that the City did not want SA Recycling to have notice. At the same time, the City wants undoubtedly will claim any objection must be asserted at the hearing of which no notice was given to us or our client. We object to such position. Our client objects to the lack of notice from the City, the lack of any notification of any time frame in which a request to appear may be made, any improper assertion in any notice claiming that failure to appear is a waiver of matters not included in Code of Civil Procedure Section 1245.235 (particularly as no notice has been afforded SA Recycling by the City), and the short time given to prepare for the hearing after only learning about it second-hand. As to the hearing substance, the City, by itself and through OCTA, undoubtedly has numerous emails, correspondence and memorandum regarding this Project. The City has access to its staff and consultants. For example, the City has unfettered access to the appraiser and the appraiser's file compiled as part of the appraisal process underlying the mandatory precondemnation appraisal and offer. Our client has not been provided such access limiting its ability to respond. Our client likewise has not been party to the internal discussions of staff relating to the site selection, the search for alternative locations that provide at least the same or greater public good and least private injury or that show there is no need to take our client's business location. We also have not been provided all of the project contracts or project plans. We request, pursuant to the Public Records Act, that we be provided the full administrative file pertaining to this project before any hearing, the precondemnation appraisal for the subject property; the appraiser's complete file(s) relating to the appraisal of the real estate and fixtures and improvements; any contract awarded for the construction of the contract; any project schedules delineating the City's commitment to construction of the project for which the subject property is sought to be taken; up-to-date project plans; correspondence between the City and OCTA and/or Paragon relating to selection of the subject property for acquisition and displacement of SA Recycling; communications between the City/OCTA/Paragon with any representative of the Valdivia family (our client's landlord) relating to the project; any funding requests and approvals for the project including any obligations to which the City has agreed to obtain and/or retain funding for this project; both internal communications between the City, OCTA and Paragon as well as communications with any third -party about this proposed condemnation. At the same time the City is failing to provide notice of the resolution of necessity hearing to us, it is informing our client through multiple communicators -- OCTA (its project partner), its consultant Paragon, its staff -- that SA Recycling will be fully displaced and the subject property will be taken as site selection has already been determined by the City. We were informed that if the project goes forward it was inevitable that SA Recycling's business location would be condemned. 2096123.1 75D-170