HomeMy WebLinkAboutrda min 1987/04/21 (2)
MINUTES OF A JOINT MEETING OF THE
CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Tuesday, April 21, 1987
4:00 to 7:05 (Reconvened at 9:30 p.m.)
ROLL CALL
Counci 1 Chamber
Public Services Building
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Member Cox;
Malcolm
Members
Nader,
McCand1iss,
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
Member Moore
Executive Director Goss, Community
Development Director Desrochers, Assistant
City Attorney Rudolf, Director of Finance
Christopher
APPROVAL OF MINUTES for the meetings of March 19 and 26, 1987.
1.
MSUC (Malcolm/Nader) to approve the minutes. Chairman Cox
abstained from the minutes of ~1arch 19; Member Malcolm abstained
from the the minutes of March 26.
2.
WORKSHOP
REPORT:
PROPOSED DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
WITH THE HOMART DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
In recappi ng the 1 ast workshop on thi s subject, Mr. Desrochers
stated that the City's financial obligation to this project will
be financed through Certificates of Participation. If interest
rates are acceptable, the downtown parking structure financing may
be included in the refinancing. A pro forma was submitted by
Homart of the costs which was to be reviewed by the financial
consultants. At the last workshop, at the suggestion of the
Council/Agency, a committee was to be formed to advise the
Counci 1 /Agency on the communi ty faci 1 i ty as part of or separate
from the center. It was a1 so di scussed that the 1 ast date to
consider a Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) would be
Tuesday, April 28, 1987.
At the last workshop, staff was asked to assign a cost to Fifth
Avenue and an appraiser has been obtained. Additionally, staff
was asked to include the upgrading of Broadway and Sears into the
DDA. Progress is being made towards having a fourth department
store as part of the DDA.
Minutes
- 2 -
April 21,1987
Director of Finance Christopher updated the Agency/Council as to
the financing aspect. It is still planned to finance the City's
contribution through Certificates of Participation that would be
issued by the City. The debt service would be paid from increment
property taxes as well as from increment sales taxes. Mr.
Christopher stated he would like to point out changes that have
taken place: (1) It is planned to include $1.3 million for the
superior courts in the financing. (2) The municipal bond market
has taken a turn for the worse. The interest rates have increased
by over one percent which impacts the debt service schedule and
the cash fl ow. Mr. Chri stopher i ntroduced Mr. Peter Ross of Dean
Witter Reynolds, financial consultant to the City. He noted that
Mr. Ross had an updated financing package to present.
Mr. Ross stated his presentation is basically the same as was
handed out to the Council/Agency at the last workshop. The
numbers have changed to reflect (1) the increased bond amount due
to the financing of the $1.3 million contribution to the County
for the courthouse; and (2) modified revenues coming from the
project in the form of tax increment revenue and sales tax revenue
in accordance with the figures provided by the redevelopment
consultant and project consultant with respect to the sales tax.
Member Malcolm pointed out that the staff report states the City
will be receiving $2.4 million representing the value of the Boys'
Club land and Fifth Avenue. The report presented by Mr. Ross does
not ref1 ect thi s amount. Mr. Desrochers referred to an attachment
to the report titled "Calculation of Redevelopment Funding". He
noted the full value of the City's contribution to this project is
$11,100,000. That figures includes $7,150,000 (Certificates of
Participation); $1,300,000: (Superior Courts); $1,300,000 (Value
of Fifth Avenue); $1,200,000 (Value of Boys Club); and $250,000
(City Expenses).
In responding to Member Malcolm's concerns, Mr. Christopher stated
he has been working with bond counsel regarding reimbursing the
City for the value of Fifth Avenue and the Boys Club.
Preliminarily, bond counsel had concerns with including the value
of the Boys Club and Fifth Avenue properties in the proposed
financing with the Certificates of Participation. Until this
problem is worked out, the proposal is not to include it in the
Certificates of Participation.
Dr. Claude Gruen of Gruen Gruen + Associates, economic consultants
to the City/Agency, responded to questions of Member Malcolm. He
stated that in 1978 when this project was being reviewed, his firm
stated the Center would have a tough competitive environment.
This is still true at this time.
Mi nutes
- 3 -
April 21,1987
Mrs. Gruen of Gruen Gruen + Associates commented that when their
fi rm di d the study in 1978 they were concerned about two factors:
(1) The shopping center was old and deteriorating in quality which
would be reflected in sales; and (2) that was at the time Plaza
Bonita was becoming a full reality and would be competing with
this center. ~'rs. Gruen further commented that if action is not
taken at this time, sales will probably decrease.
Responding to Member Malcolm, Mrs. Gruen stated, in her opinion,
there is a very good probability that the center will be
successful in terms of paying back the investment.
Discussion regarding the financing and value of the Boys Club and
Fifth Avenue properties followed. Chairman Cox clarified the
discussion. He pointed out that Mr. Malcolm feels that the City
should be compensated for the Boys Club site and Fifth Avenue.
The Business Points Letter deals with assuming that the City/
Agency is agreeable to transfer the Boys Club site to the
Redevelopment Agency. The Redevelopment Agency will be
compensated in the manner that is specified in the Business Points
Letter (page 4, item b). The Agency is being compensated, but not
the City. If it is the desire to pursue compensating the City, it
could be done in a variety of ways. One way could be by
increasing the amount of the Certificate of Participation.
Mr. Christopher stated the $11,100,000 figure does not have
anything to do with the value of Fifth Avenue or the Boys Club.
Member Malcolm asked if the City wanted to be compensated for the
Boys Club and Fifth Avenue, would it be necessary to increase the
Certificates of Participation? Mr. Christopher responded that
basically this is true. Chairman Cox's suggestion of increasing
the amount of the Certificates was discussed with bond counsel.
Bond counsel preliminarily had concerns with increasing the
amounts of the Certificates in order to pay for the value of Fifth
Avenue and the Boys Club.
Mr. Christopher commented that originally it was the intention of
the City/Agency to close Fifth Avenue and pass over the Boys Club
to Homart at no cost. In negotiating, it was decided that this
was no longer acceptable to the City/Agency and a value needed to
be assigned to this property. In response, Homart initially
started out with $250,000 for a community center. This figure has
since been raised to $500,000. Homart has put up an additional
$750,000 that the City could allocate in any way it chooses in
response to a need for a value for the property. Homart has
committed $200,000 for the roadway and pedestrian path. Another
$1 million has been offered by Homart as an incentive for
acquiring a fourth department store.
Minutes
- 4 -
April 21, 1987
Dr. Gruen asked i f i t i s correct that thi s money caul d be used to
reduce the funding if desired? Mr. Christopher responded that is
correct.
Mr. Christopher stated in negotiating, the City/Agency emphasized
that ultimate protection of the City's General Fund was desired.
Because the Certificates of Participation to be issued by the City
would be using the General Fund as security, staff wanted to be
sure there wou1 d be very 1 itt1 e ri sk i nvolved. Staff 1 imi ted the
revenues to pay back the debt service to the projections on the
sales tax and property tax increment. Very conservative estimates
on those fi gures were used. He further stated staff i s close to
finalizing a guaranty by Homart whereby they will guaranty a
certain level of projections of their sales tax increment through
1996 (90%).
Member Malcolm asked Homart representatives if the Boys Club site
was needed by them at thi s time. Mr. Mal co1m suggested 1 eavi ng
the Boys Club at its present site until the fourth major
department store would require use of the site.
Mr. Thomas Gourguechon, representing
responded that wi thout bei ng ab1 e to
could work around the Boys Club
Therefore, they would not enter into
to buy it or trade for it.
Homart Development Company,
consolidate initially, they
site and not require it.
any agreement wi th the City
Member McCand1iss asked if it would be possible to build into the
agreement an either/or situation. If the Boys Club site becomes
available to Homart, the City/Agency will be paid the agreed
amount, or, if i t i s deci ded to keep the Boys C1 ub bui 1 di ng, then
the City/Agency will not be compensated. Ms. McCand1iss noted she
would like additional time to make this decision. There are a lot
of i ssues that have not been addressed regardi ng the vi abi 1 i ty of
that facility that would be more appropriately dealt with in a
committee rather than built into this agreement.
Mr. Gourguechon responded he is concerned that a decision is
needed as soon as possible. He pointed out that all of their
planning assumptions for the last 18 months have included the Boys
Club parcel. This parcel is a fairly major component at a
cri tical area of the si te i n terms of bei ng adj acent to Fi fth
Avenue. Responding to Member Nader's question. Mr. Gourguechon
stated they would need a decision within two weeks.
Councilman Nader questioned
page 3(a) where it states:
the
Business
Points
Letter
i tem
on
"Redeveloper's cumulative obligation to pay City pursuant to
the guarantee shall not exceed $1.5 million..."
Minutes
- 5 -
April 21,1987
Mr. Desrochers stated the amount i s 1 imi ted to 10% of the bond
issue due to the new tax law and upon the advice of bond counsel.
Mr. Christopher noted this is still under discussion with bond
counsel.
Lonnie Thomas, 660 Telegraph Canyon Road, Chu1a Vista,
representing the Girls and Boys Club of Chu1a Vista, addressed the
Agency/Council. Mr. Thomas distributed a letter which he read to
the Agency/Council. The letter expressed the desire of the
Executi ve Board of the Gi r1 s and Boys C1 ub to work cooperati ve1y
with the City to identify a viable solution to fill the void
created by the relocation of the existing club facility.
Chairman Cox questioned if the Boys Club facility could be
retained, would the Boys and Girls Club be able to staff and
maintain the facility? Mr. Thomas responded he has not been able
to discuss this with the Executive Board, however, he has
discussed the matter with the Executive Director. It would take
approximately $110,000 a year to staff and maintain the facility.
$33,000 is currently received from United Way from that location.
Respondi ng to Member McCand1 i ss' questi on, Mr. Thomas noted the
new site has a budget of approximately $160,000 with $70,000
coming from United Way. It was noted that the existing Girls Club
site on "L" Street will be maintained as a day care center.
Member Mal colm asked when the Executi ve Board woul d be ab1 e to
meet and make a decision regarding the ability to staff and
mai ntai n the faci 1 i ty? Mr. Thomas stated they woul d report back
in one week.
Member McCand1 i ss stated she waul d 1 ike to see documentation to
the ability of the Girls and Boys Club to support three
facilities. She further commented there is a need for youth
recreational activities in that area. The Park and Recreation
Department has been asked to look at all the recreational services
needed for that area.
~1r. George Carney, 555 Naples Street, Chu1a Vista, spoke in favor
of keeping the Boys Club site open. He stressed the strong need
for the Boys Club in that area as a positive alternative for kids
to go to. He pointed out that there is a gang problem developing
in Chula Vista.
Dr. Brewer Casey, 34 E1 Capitan, Chu1a Vista, distributed a letter
to the Council/Agency which he read. Dr. Casey appealed to the
Council/Agency to keep the Boys Club open at its present site.
Minutes
- 6 -
Apri 1 21, 1987
Mr. Desrochers pointed out unresolved issues:
(1) The Design Review Process - The developer feels they should
not have an obligation to bear additional costs brought about
by the design review process; City staff cannot concur.
(2) The Fourth Major Department Store Staff is pleased that
Homart will put forth $1,000,000 for a fourth major department
store, however, this offer expires in 5 years. Staff wants to
know what will happen after 5 years.
(3) Broadway and Sears Staff wants as strong of language as
possible in the agreement to insure the upgrading of these
stores.
Mr. Gourguechon stated regardi ng the fourth department store i ssue
that Homart does not want to be saddled with a contingent
liability beyond the 5 year period. Homart believes it is very
possi b1 e to secure a major department store wi thi n that
timeframe. Regarding the design review, Homart is looking for
some potential relief in the process. They want to be sure their
costs are kept under control.
The Council/Agency recessed
reconvened at 9:30 p.m.
at
7:05
p.m.
The
Council/Agency
6.
REPORT
REGARDING
COLORS.
NATURE
INTERPRETIVE
CENTER
At the Agency meeting of April 2, 1987, Members discussed the
exterior color scheme of the Nature Interpretive Center. It was
noted that the salmon color being utilized appeared to be pink,
and staff was directed to review the records on approval of the
color to ensure that the stucco being applied was the color
approved by the Agency.
Community Development Director Desrochers commented that
salmon color used on the exterior seems to be brighter in
sunlight than under fluorescent indoor lighting.
the
the
Member McCand1iss noted that the architects have designed a
beautiful building but she is disappointed that the color scheme
does not fit in with the environment. She has talked to different
people about this and has received various views and would like to
see the architect be able to present some other concept.
Minutes
- 7 -
April 21, 1987
The architect, Tony Cutri, stated that once landscaping is
installed in the Center, the colors will not seem that prominent.
He asked that once the exhibits are put in, if the City still
feels that the colors are not appropriate then they can change the
concept at that time.
In answer to Member McCand1iss' question, Mr. Cutri stated he has
no idea of what it would cost to repaint the building but
indicated it would be very disruptive.
MSC (Malcolm/Cox) to approve the report and the colors.
McCandliss voted "no."
Member
2.
WORKSHOP:
REPORT
PROPOSED DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
WITH THE HOMART DEVELOPMENT COMPANY (Continued
from 4 p.m. meeting)
MSUC (Malcolm/Cox) to require the Redevelopers to go through the
Design Review Committee.
Agency discussion followed regarding the 20% condition: the
Redeveloper would be precluded from leasing space in excess of 20%
of the newly constructed floor area to any tenant transferri ng
into the Center from another location in the City and that the
Redeveloper shoul d not recei ve credi t for purposes of the sa1 es
tax guarantee requirement for sales tax generated by any tenant
transferring into this Center.
Discussion ensued between Member Malcolm and Mr. Gourguechon
regarding the financial aspects of the City allowing that 20%;
noted the Redeveloper's position of leasing more than 20% of the
square foot area to tenants transferring would be subject to a
penalty; suggestion by Member Malcolm to give the Redeveloper the
entire 20% credit but if he does not meet the income level, he
wi 11 have to make up the di fference to the Ci ty and subtract the
20%.
Member McCand1iss questioned the legal ramificaions if Homart
reaches the 20% transfers and then other businesses want to
transfer to the Center also.
Mr. Gourguechon noted the penal ty c1 ause addi ng that they wou1 d
have to turn the tenants away which is a legal concern.
MS (Ma1co1m/McCand1iss) to accept staff recommendation on #16:
In order to maximize the amount of sales tax increments
generated by the expansion of the shopping Center which
constitute new income to City and not a transfer of existing
Minutes
- 8 -
April 21,1987
revenues from another location within the City, Redeveloper
shall be precluded from leasing space in excess of 20% of the
newly constructed fl oor area to any tenant transferri ng i nto
the Center from another location within the City of Chu1a
Vista and Redeveloper shall not receive credit for purposes of
its sales tax guaranty requirement (obligation 3) for sales
tax generated by any tenant transferri ng i nto the Center from
another location within the City of Chula Vista.
AMENDMENT TO MOTION
(Nader/McCandliss) to amend the motion that it would be subject to
Council's determination that it doesn't pose an anti-trust problem.
The motion as amended carried unanimously.
Agency discussion followed as to the assurances that Sears and The
Broadway will be updated; discussion on getting the fourth major
store and the costs associated with that estimate ~Ihich is from
$13 to $15 million; the Redeveloper may need some participation
from the City in getting the fourth major store in; Redeveloper
havi ng i t acceptab1 e that they waul d put up the $1 mill i on to get
the major store and it would be 5 years from the date of
completion to get the store in; the DDA will address the fact that
the Center will be a quality Center comparable to the University
Towne Centre; the Redeveloper will be comi ng to the Agency shari ng
their merchandising plan; questioned as to what will happen after
the 5 years - what incentive would the Redeveloper have to bring
in the fourth major store; if the City is giving up Fifth Avenue
and the Boys' Club, they should have definite assurance that the
fourth major store will come in.
MSUC (Malcolm/Cox) to direct staff to include the 5 year clause in
the DDA (that it will be from the date of completion).
Mr. Gourguechon remarked that he wou1 d 1 i ke to restate and retract
part of the offer he made earlier regarding the Boys' Club site.
Chairman Cox stated that a report will be coming back next week on
this item, along with the financial aspects.
Further Agency discussion ensued with Perry Hall, also
representing Homart regarding the building costs; the $6.7 million
overhead development costs; suggestion to give the Agency 75%
savings of any construction costs; Member Malcolm's statement that
what the Redeveloper is offering the City is not a fair
negotiation, it is only good for Homart and not the City.
Minutes
- 9 -
April 21, 1987
~1r. Hall noted the performa report, citing the figures based on
the first draft. He added that Homart is taking all the risks on
the construction costs, and if there are any savings here, it
should be 100% to Homart.
Member Malcolm stated he would like to see Homart put in
legitimate costs such as hiring their architect,
environmental people, etc. List all these "hard cost"
then figure some type of split.
Mr. Gourguechon responded that unless the Agency is willing to
share the downside of the building costs, they should not be
involved in sharing the upside. Homart is taking all the risk and
because of this, they should have the freedom and ability to
retain as much savings as possible. He added that they have gone
through a great deal in trying to incorporate environmental
i ssues; they tri ed to protect everyone and addressed all of the
concerns of the City and the citizens; their letter of credit is
as good as cash and would guarantee their performance.
all their
engineer,
items and
Mr. Hall stated there are other factors that playa big part such
as Homart has 50% of their finances tied up in retail
development. They are not trying to "pull the wool over the eyes
of the Agency or the citizens" in any way, because if they did
this, they would not be able to develop any other Center in the
Country.
Member Malcolm declared he is seriously concerned that the
Redeveloper's are being honest; they are right in estimating their
cost; they are willing to participate in their substantial
savings; he would like to see the agreement specify that the
Agency will be given the receipts for the construction costs and
he wants to believe that the Redevelopers are here in the City to
do a good deal.
Chai rman Cox suggested that thi s matter be referred back to staff
to work with the developer to bring this back next week.
Member Nader stated he agrees wi th Member ~la1 co1m' s concerns and
would like to see the agreement take care of those concerns.
Mr. Gourguechon stated that by Fri day he waul d have to bri ng thi s
back to his Board and to his leasing department who will have to
work out the economic components. At the very minimum there is a
fair deal here. They will consider the Agency's concerns but feel
that they have gone overboard on many of these conditions. They
wou1 d prefer to see no restricti ons by the Ci ty and the Ci ty
involvement on their leasing. They are concerned with the legal
implications but feel they can address those problems.
Minutes
- 10 -
April 21, 19B7
**JOINT SESSION WITH CITY COUNCIL
3.
RESOLUTION
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA APPROVING CONVEYANCE TO THE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF GRANT DEEDS FOR
495 I STREET AND SLIVER PARCELS LOCATED AT
FIFTH AVENUE AND H STREET AND FIFTH AVENUE
AND I STREET
OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING CONVEYANCE FROM THE
CITY OF GRANT DEEDS FOR 495 I STREET AND
SLIVER PARCELS LOCATED AT FIFTH AVENUE AND
H STREET AND FIFTH AVENUE AND I STREET
4.
RESOLUTION
The Redevelopment Agency is in the process of negotiating a
Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) with the Homart
Development Company for the expansion and renovation of the Chu1a
Vista Shopping Center. The Boys' Club site, located at 495 I
Street and two small sliver parcels, located at the corners of
Fifth Avenue and I Street and Fifth Avenue and H Street, currently
owned by the City, are important components of financing and
redevelopment plans for the Shopping Center. This item is to
convey those parcels from the City to the Agency for inclusion in
the DDA for redevelopment of the Center.
Community Development Director Desrochers added that this transfer
of property from the Ci ty to the Redevelopment Agency i s one of
the side issues which is involved in this transaction, which is
not covered in the Business Points letter being transmitted
separately to the Agency. This transaction mayor may not involve
payment from the Agency to the Ci ty. Because of the evo1 vi ng
nature of the total financial package involving the City, the
Agency and Homart, a completed package of recommendations has not
yet been developed. Action on these items, therefore, are not
recommended for final action until the entire financial package is
completed and presented to the Agency.
Di rector Desrochers asked that items 3 and 4 be conti nued to the
next City Council meeting.
MSUC (Cox/Nader) to continue items 3 and 4 to the meeting of April
28.
**REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY:
5.
REPORT
PROPOSAL FOR THE FORMATION OF A CITIZENS'
COMMITTEE TO REVIEW PLANS FOR THE
PROVISION OF A COMMUNITY FACILITY
ASSOCIATED WITH THE RENOVATION OF THE
CHULA VISTA SHOPPING CENTER
Minutes
- 11 -
April 21, 1987
The Agency has expressed its desire to establish a committee
comprised of interested citizens to review plans for the expansion
and renovation of the Chu1a Vista Shopping Center in regard to the
provision of a community facility.
The purpose of the citizens committee will be to work with
representatives from the Homart Development Company and City staff
to develop recommendations for the provision of a multi-purpose
community facility in connection with the expansion and renovation
of the Chu1a Vista Shopping Center which can be used for a variety
of community functions and activities including meetings, public
forums, exhibitions, recitals, and community theater.
COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEE
The committee will be composed of seven members as follows:
One representative from the
One representative from the
One representative from
Association;
One member from the City Council;
Two members at large from the surrounding community;
One member from the Chamber of Commerce.
Town Centre Project Area Committee;
Cultural Arts Committee;
the Shopping Center Merchants
Member McCand1 i ss stated that she woul d 1 i ke to see a change i n
the format of the group. Rather than a member of the Chamber of
Commerce, it should be a member from the community-at-large, such
as someone from the Boys'/Girls' Club. At this point, she noted
that the Agency has two weeks in order to make a decision so she
is not sure they even need this Citizens' Committee at this time.
Member Nader referred to his motion made at a previous meeting
(March 17) where the Council agreed to institute this Citizens'
Committee. He also noted that if the decision on the Boys' Club
is satisfied, the Committee would still be a viable function. The
intent of the Committee is that it would serve as an Advisory
Committee to the Redevelopers to target what type of businesses
should be put into that Center and what would meet the needs of
the community.
Member Malcolm stated that he is adamantly opposed to that type of
Committee; he wants the Redeveloper to have a very successful
Shopping Center and they do not need to be tol d what type of
tenants they should have etc.
MSUC (McCand1iss/Nader) to change the member from the Chamber of
Commerce to a member of the community-at-1arge and not necessarily
from the surrounding community; that the City Council member be a
member representing the combined Boys' and Girls' Club
Minutes
- 12 -
April 21, 19B7
organization and that the meeting of this Committee be held in
abeyance unti 1 such time as the Agency gets the report back next
week as to the retention of the Boys' Club.
Chairman Cox suggested that the
community group to advise Homart.
Member Nader again referred to his previous motion made when the
Council considered the closing of Fifth Avenue which included this
Community Committee. He remarked that if the Council wished to
change their mind about it, that motion should be reconsidered.
Project Area
Committee
be
the
MSUC (Cox/Malcolm) to bring back the original motion made by
Member Nader at the Public Hearing of the closing of Fifth Avenue
and any subsequent meetings dealing with the Community Committee.
7.
RESOLUTION
APPROVING NATURE INTERPRETIVE CENTER 2"
AND 8" HIGHLINE WATER SERVICE PLAN FOR
BIDDING AND APPROVING FUNDS THEREFOR
The permanent water service to the Nature Interpretive Center will
be constructed with the south 1 evee road improvement. Unti 1 that
project is implemented, temporary domestic water and fire service
needs to be extended to the Nature Center. A plan for a temporary
high1ine (above ground) facility has been prepared by Rick
Engineering and is being presented for Agency and City Council
consideration.
The high1ine plan has been reviewed by the City Engineer and the
project is exempt from CEQA Environmental Review under Section
15302 Class 2(c).
The recommendation
resolution:
i s
tha t
the
Redevelopment Agency
adopt
the
1. Approving the Nature Interpreti ve Center 2" and 8"
high1 ine water service plan;
2. Authorizing the Ci ty Engineer to solicit bids fo r
construction of said services; and
3.
Approving
therefor.
the
expenditure
of
$81,300
for
construction
RESOLUTION OFFERED BY CHAIRMAN COX, the reading of the text was
waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved unanimously.
Minutes
- 13 -
April 21, 1987
8.
RESOLUTION
EXTENDING AGREEMENT WITH LARRY 1. PEEPLES,
INC. FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES IN CONNECTION
WITH THE SECOND HARBOR ENTRANCE AND
AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE SAID
EXTENDED AGREEMENT
RESOLUTION OFFERED BY MEMBER MALCOLM, the readi ng of the text was
waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved with Councilwoman
McCand1iss out.
9.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
10. DIRECTOR'S REPORT
11. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT
None.
None.
12. MEMBERS I CO~IMENTS
None.
The Agency recessed at 11 :45 p.m. to Closed Session to discuss
Sierra Club v. r~arsh, Sierra Club v. Coastal Commission et. al.
and items of potential litigation.
The City Clerk was excused and the City r~anager reported that the
Session ended at 12:05 a.m.
ADJOURNMENT AT 12:05 a.m. to the regular meeting of April 28, at 7
~;~ç¡: ~ity Cm,; 1 ."ti ã:~ ~~t~
C Recordi ng Secretary ~ C1 erk ¿J
0995C