Can someone explain how you can get an order for possession without a
Resolution of Necessity approved by the CTC. How can the FHWA take my property
without a RON? According to the final minutes of the Oct 24 2007 CTC meeting,
my RON was not approved.
Anybody have a legal answer?
MINUTES
CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
www.catc.ca.gov
OCTOBER 24, 2007
West Sacramento, California
MINUTES October 24, 2007
Andre Boutros, Chief Delivery Officer, reviewed the statutory authority for
this item. In adopting a Resolution of
Necessity the Commission must determine that (1) public interest and necessity
require the project, (2) the
proposed project is planned or located in a manner that is most compatible with
the greater public good and the
least private injury, and (3) the property described in the resolution is
necessary for the proposed project. Under
State law the Commission does not determine the amount or value of compensation.
Tom Hallenbeck, District 9 Director, provided an overview of the properties for
which the Department is seeking
Resolutions of Necessity.
Kenney L. Scruggs, Attorney and property owner, addressed the Commission on
behalf of the Sean McClelland,Sedoo Family, Loyd J. Hopper and Tamara Cohn
properties. She provided a description of the sequence of
events. She stated that the owners support expanding the two lane highway to a
four lane highway. However,
they are not in agreement with the sidewalks and the removal of 100 trees.
Commissioner Zarian recommended that the Department and the property owners try
to come up with an
alternative.
Commissioner Lindsey stated that the Commission cannot always send the
Resolutions of Necessity back. He
emphasized that the Commission's job is not to determine if the design is
adequate. Commissioner Guardino
agreed with Commissioner Lindsey.
-- Sean McClelland
09-Iny-395-PM 73.16
Resolution C-19712
2.4a.(1) A D
Commissioner Zarian moved to postpone the decision on the Resolution of
Necessity and bring the item back in
December. Commissioner Chalker seconded the motion, which carried 5-1.
Commissioner Lindsey voted no.
(Commissioners Bergeson was absent.)
Mr. Mclelland/Homeless Victim:
I am surprised you are asking for a legal answer to your issue, since you are
being represented by an Attorney (Kenney L. Scruggs)? - what is clear to me is
that you are a very unhappy person.
"Commissioner Zarian moved to postpone the decision on the Resolution of
Necessity and bring the item back in
December."
What happened in December?
I for one would like very much for this so called homeless victim to take his
sob story somewhere else, perhaps to an attorney's office who might be able to
help him, or set him straight.
How many postings in the various forums are we going to have to read from him?
I would like to see the Site Administrator (Rocky? - Janis?) set the guy
straight or block his postings/rants/sob stories that he wants settled for free.
Enough is enough!
Show me the CTC minutes with my RON approval and I will go away. Good luck and
best wishes.
Surely, there has to be one. Right?
Sean
I received a RON on my property that states it was approved on Oct 24 2007.
The October 24 CTC Summary Action Report and Minutes don't match. The summary
action has an approved RON. The minutes request a Motion to hold RON over
until December 2007 meeting approved 5-1.
Which document trumps the other in a legal procedure?
Under the FOIA I requested the CTC Minutes that include my Approved RON, but
have'nt received one. I received some sort of paperwork that contains an
approved RON from October 24, but it is not certified nor official looking.
I've requested the minutes, but they don't seem to exist.
Is this standard operating procedure for most DOT's.
MEETING SUMMARY/ACTION TAKEN REPORT
October 24, 2007 – Sacramento
Note – "√" Follow-Up Items will be posted at onramp.dot.ca.gov/hq/transprog/,
the day following Agenda De-briefing.
Office of CTC Liaison Page 1 of 2 Prepared: November 29, 2007
www.dot.ca.gov/hq/transprog/ctcliaison.htm
Note: This document was prepared following the California Transportation
Commission (CTC) meeting and is a reflection of the
Department's interpretation of actions taken by the Commission.
Tab #
Ref. #
Item Description
STATUS
CT
Follow-up Required
1
1.1
Roll Call
All present except Commissioners Alvarado and Tavaglione. Assemblymember Nava
(Ex-officio) was also present.
2
4.1
Adoption of the 2008 Fund Estimate
Resolution G-07-06 (STIP)
Resolution G-07-09 (Aeronautics)
Resolution G-07-06 – STIP Fund Estimate Adoption approved, as modified at the
meeting.
Resolution G-07-09 - Aeronautics Fund Estimate Adoption approved as presented.
√
3
4.2
Adoption of 2008 State Transportation Improvement Program Guidelines
Resolution G-07-07
Approved.
4
4.3
Presentation and Consideration of AB 1467 HOT Lane Guidelines and Application
Resolution G-07-08
Approved.
5
4.4
Proposition 1B Trade Corridors Improvement Fund Proposal
Information only.
6
4.5
Proposition 1B Trade Corridors Improvement Fund Program Development – Timeline,
Criteria and Project Nomination Package
Timeline approved through November 6-7, 2007 CTC meeting. Approval of the
criteria and nomination package held over until November 2007 meeting.
7
2.4a.(1)
Resolution of Necessity – Appearance
-- Sean McClelland
09-Iny-395-PM 73.16
Resolution C-19712
Approved.
7
2.4a.(2)
Resolution of Necessity – Appearance
-- Gerald C. Sedoo and Mikel D. Sedoo, as Trustees of the Sedoo Family Trust
09-Iny-395-PM 73.73
Resolution C-19713
Motion to hold RON over until December 2007 meeting approved 5-1.
7
2.4a.(2)
Resolution of Necessity – Appearance
-- Loyd J. Hopper, et ux.
09-Iny-395-PM 73.76
Resolution C-19714
Motion to hold RON over until December 2007 meeting approved 5-1.
