SUPPORT THIS INDEPENDENT JOURNALISM
The article you’re about to read is from our reporters doing their important work — investigating, researching, and writing their stories. We want to provide informative and inspirational stories that connect you to the people, issues and opportunities within our community. Journalism requires lots of resources. Today, our business model has been interrupted by the pandemic; the vast majority of our advertisers’ businesses have been impacted. That’s why the SC Times is now turning to you for financial support. Learn more about our new Insider’s program here. Thank you.
By Jim Shilander
Orange County Superior Court Judge Thierry Colaw ruled Friday that the City of San Clemente must return more than $10 million dollars collected from the Beach Parking Impact Fee fund, collected since 1989 from new development provide new beach parking places, to residents.
Colaw, who ruled against the city in January in the case, formally signed the order of judgment in the case Friday. It is still to be determined if the plaintiff’s in the case will be entitled to collect attorney’s fees as well. A hearing on that motion will be held Friday. The city council has already voted to appeal the ruling.
The ruling requires the city to return the Beach Parking Impact funds as of Aug. 15, 2012, the date the suit was filed, in addition to interest on that amount. The city also has 90 days to compile a list of addresses that paid into the fund, along with the date of and amount of those payments, as well as the name on the last official County Assessor’s property tax list for the address. City staff must compile the list
The repayment to residents will be calculated based on the year and amount of payment, plus interest earned. However, the city will not be required to return funds used for the purchase of the El Camino Real lot between Ichibiri Japanese Restaurant and Kaylani Coffee, where it intends to build a more than 30-space lot using other funding sources. Any other funds paid out before August of 2012 are also similarly exempted.
The decision can be read here: