Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County staff find unpaid fees in long‑running development agreements; owners to be noticed of default
Summary
A 24‑month review found missing required payments in two Aloha/Rain Shadow Ranch development agreements (phase 1 and phases 2–3), representing shortfalls of roughly $33,333 and $30,594 respectively; staff will issue default notices and give owners 30 days to cure while evaluating civil remedies and possible agreement amendments.
County planning staff told the Board that audits of long‑standing development agreements revealed previously unrecognized unpaid fees tied to off‑site improvements (notably contributions toward a planned Drayton Boulevard). Andrea Pauling, deputy community development director, said staff originally reported those agreements as in compliance at the last 24‑month review but subsequent auditing found shortfalls. For Aloha/Rain Shadow Ranch phase 1 (43 lots) the agreement required a total contribution of $199,999.98 made in 18 installments; staff found only 14 payments were received, creating a $33,333.33 shortfall. For Aloha/Rain Shadow phases 2–3 the agreement required $51,627.94 in two payments; the second payment of $30,594.35 was not received after the phase‑three final map was recorded in 2018.
"The owner's failure to pay the fees ... does constitute a default," Andrea Pauling told the board; staff said they will proceed to notify owners of default and provide a 30‑day cure period, then return with recommended next steps. County counsel and the district attorney's office participated in the discussion; legal remedies under the development agreements include amendments, cancellation, or civil claims for sums owed. District Attorney staff noted that building‑code violations can carry misdemeanor consequences but that unpaid fees are typically pursued as civil claims.
Valley Vista Estates, a separate 261‑lot subdivision, remains generally in compliance, but staff reported outstanding questions around acceptance/maintenance of drainage improvements for a particular open‑space parcel; a landscape maintenance association (LMA) formed in 2020 now appears to be performing maintenance and staff will continue outreach to confirm responsibility and bring a repeal or closure of obligations back when resolved.
Why it matters: these development agreements were written to fund off‑site improvements; unpaid fees reduce funds available for public infrastructure (county staff noted obligations tied to Drayton Boulevard and sound walls). Staff will return with legal and policy recommendations after internal consultation and outreach to affected property owners.
