SR-400-07 (2)
f:\atty\muni\strpts\bar\AAcleanup
City Council Meeting 1-25-05 Santa Monica, California
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Staff
SUBJECT: An Emergency Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Santa Monica
Amending Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.20.28.020 To
Correct The Inadvertent Deletion of Recent Amendments To This Section
Through the Adoption of Ordinance Number 2139 (CCS)
Introduction
The attached proposed ordinance is prepared to correct a nonsubstantive problem
which arose because the City Council adopted two separately prepared amendments to
Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.20.28.020 in the months of July and August
2004. Adoption of the proposed ordinance is necessary to render both amendments
effective by establishing that adoption of the second ordinance did not implicitly repeal
the first. The ordinance is presented to the City Council for adoption as an emergency
ordinance.
Background
Early last year, the City Attorney’s Office prepared an ordinance, Ordinance Number
2139 (CCS), which amended various sections of the City’s Zoning Ordinance to
conform hearing and processing requirements for discretionary land use permits with
the California Permit Streamlining Act and modify or clarify the time for issuing
Temporary Use Permits and Administrative Approvals. Due to the press of business,
that ordinance waited in a queue for City Council consideration for several months.
1
During that time, the City Council considered another ordinance, Ordinance Number
2131 (CCS), which modified development standards, established design standards, and
modified the application review process for properties in the R2, R3, and R4 Districts.
Both of these ordinances amended Santa Monica Municipal Code Section
9.04.20.28.020. Ordinance Number 2131 (CCS) came to the City Council for approval
on July 27, 2004 and was effective on August 26, 2006. Ordinance Number 2139
(CCS) came to the City Council for approval on September 14, 2004, and was effective
on October 14, 2004. This latter ordinance did not include the modifications to Section
9.04.20.28.020 that had just been implemented by Ordinance Number 2131 (CCS).
As a general rule of law, the adoption of a statute which is inconsistent with a pre-
existing statute but does not acknowledge the pre-existing provision, may repeal the
pre-existing provision by implication.
Discussion
The proposed emergency ordinance would incorporate both the previously adopted
ordinances’ amendments to Section 9.04.20.28.020 into one ordinance. This would
thereby effectuate both Council enactments and ensure that the rule of repeal by
implication does not operate to defeat the Council’s previous actions.
Financial/Budget Impact
There are no financial impacts.
2
Recommendation
It is respectfully recommended that the accompanying ordinance be adopted
immediately as an emergency measure to ensure that the Council’s policy decisions are
effectuated as quickly as possible under the circumstances.
PREPARED BY: Marsha Jones Moutrie, City Attorney
Barry A. Rosenbaum, Senior Land Use Attorney
See adopted Ordinance No. 2148 (CCS)
3