Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1986/01/27 MINUTES OF THE JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL/SCHOOL DISTRICTS Monday, January 27, 1986 Council Chamber 4:00 p.m. Public Services Building Mayor Greg Cox opened the meeting at 4:15 p.m., welcoming the three school districts to the meeting. 1. ROLL CALL Greg Cox, Mayor Gayle McCandliss, Councilwoman Leonard Moore, Councilman David Malcolm, Councilman Mary Gwen Brummitt, Trustee, Southwestern College Raymond F. Ellerman, Interim Superintendent, Southwestern College Joseph D. Cummings, Chula Vista School Board Penny Allen, Chula Vista City School District Opal Fuller, Chula Vista City School District Sharon Giles, Chula Vista City School District Lewis Beall, Chula Vista City School District Judith Bauer, Chula Vista City School District & Sweetwater Union High School District Ruth Chapman, Sweetwater Union High School District Lita David, Sweetwater Union High School District Nick Aguilar Anthony J. Trujillo, Sweetwater Union High School District Steve Hogan, Sweetwater Union High School District 2. DEVELOPERS' FEES a. Report of Staff analysis of the Community School Facilities Task Force Report Dr. David Perry, representing Sweetwater Union High School stated that they read and reviewed the Task Force Report on school fees. They agreed with most of the recommendations except the freeze on developers' fees. On January 30, their Board will have a meeting at which time the staff will be recommending to the Board that they fully adopt the fee schedule as proposed.* *See attached Developer Fee Recommendation -2- DEVELOPER FEE REC01I~NDATIOII I. Defined area (1~ miles from existing high schools) Phase I Phase II Phase ZII Phase IV 211186 Sq. ft. 7/1/85- 10/1/85- ½~½~86- 4/1/86- 7/1/86- 9/30/85 ~£t8~85 3/31/86 6/30/86 1/31/86 0-700 $1,060' $1,370 $1,370 $1,370 $1,370 701-1,000 $1,060 $1,370 $1,680 $1,990 $2,300 1,001-1,300 $1,385 $1,800 $2,190 $2,595 $3,000 1,300 + $1,705 $2,220 $2,700 $3,200 $3,700 *A11 amounts to be adjusted automatically by the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index. II. Undefined area {in excess of 1½ miles from existing high schools) Sq. ft. July 1, 1986 0-700 $1,370' 701-1,000 $2,300 1,001-1,300 $3,000 1,300 + $3,700 *All amounts to be adjusted automatically by the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index. Minutes - 3 January 27, 1986 City Council/School District 2b. Mr. Andy Campbell, Administative Planning, Sweetwater Union High School, stated there is no new money in the State budget for construction of school facilities; however, there is a proposal to put a state issue on the ballot in November for an $800 million bond issue. Mr. Campbell then noted the amount of students enrolled and housed in Chula Vista. He added staff is looking into demographics, housing the students, and boundary changes. They are also looking into Leroy Green Funding, plus year-round schools. In answer to Council's questions, Dr. Perry stated they are collecting fees from the City of San Diego under AB201. They have met with the City Manager of National City and that City may raise their fees from $450 to $2,700. One option National City has is to use redevelopment funding in lieu of developers' fees. Presently, staff is working with Imperial Beach staff. Councilman Malcolm declared that the Governor, in his State message, made a commitment to house students, stating it was a very important issue and he will find a solution to this problem. Councilman Malcolm questioned why not implement AB 201 on Chula Vista's apartments and go the same fee schedule as the City of San Diego. Why should Chula Vista be charged fees that are not equal to National City and Imperial Beach? Why this imparity? Starting February 1st, Chula Vista will be paying an increase in the developers'fees; much more so than any other area. Chula Vista is paying the highest developers' fees in the County. Why should there be an increase in the fees until there is some parity level? Dr. Perry responded that staff does not feel they are close to any solution from the Governor's office through legislation because of the Gann initiative. There is a perception that lottery monies can be used for construction of facilities; however, this is not true. San Diego is now paying developers' fees under the AB 201 for the apartments so there is some equity there. National City has only about 30 building permits per year. Councilman Malcolm noted that the 30 building permits per year are major developments; one permit could be as much as 200 units. Judy Bauer, Sweetwater High School District, stated they are concerned with collecting fees because they have an obligation to house the children in this district. Minutes - 4 ~ January 27, 1986 City Council/School District Councilman Malcolm responded that they should have been doing this years ago, noting in the community of San Ysidro, hundreds of apartment buildings had been built for which the district could have collected about ~2 million in developers' fees. Mrs. Bauer declared the District is prepared to file negative environmental reports, which will stop all construction in cities which do not cooperate in the collection of fees. Councilman Moore commented that Chula Vista is the District's "best customer" and why are they treating Chula Vistans this way, by increasing the fees and not even collecting them from other areas. Councilman Malcolm commented that the process has been very slow. Until National City and Imperial Beach become "on board" and there is more of a parity with San Diego, he would like to see before any further steps are taken that this imbalance is picked up with the other two cities. He questioned whether the District would be suing National City if they do not collect developers' fees. Mrs. Bauer indicated that if National City disapproves the developers' fees it would become a decision of the Board as to what to do next - perhaps file the 201 resolution. Noting the fee schedule as proposed by Dr. Perry, Councilman Malcolm stated Chula Vista is paying 30% more than the City of San Diego. Superintendent Joe Trujillo indicated he has problems with that and will be looking into that issue adding this will be put on as a discussion item at their meeting of January 30. Superintendent Trujillo added that in discussing the issue with the City of Imperial Beach, they asked not to have the developers' fees brought up at the time they had the Redevelopment issue on their ballot. They promised to consider it in December. He does agree with Councilman Malcolm that there should be equity. Board Member Sharon Giles referred to the enrollment projection issued for the Chula Vista City School District. She noted the rapid rate increase due to the major developments proposed such as EastLake, E1 Rancho del Rey, Bayfront and Bonita Long Canyon. In answer to Councilman Malcolm's question, Business Administrator John Linn, Chula Vista City School District, stated the District is collecting fees in San Diego for apartments and has been doing so for a number of years. They collect fees from all jurisdictions served by the Chula Vista City School District. The fees however, are falling behind the construction cost index. Minutes - 5 - January 27, 1986 City Council/School District c. Ad Hoc/Regional Costs (Task Force) Councilman Moore stated the Task Force is a joint effort for all the Districts. If the Task Force is to continue, their funding should be jointly shared by the Districts. b. Developers' Fees Councilman Malcolm referred to the increase in the developers' fees stating that renters cannot afford to have their rent increased any more. He declared that by April 1st, if the Districts do not come up with a parity, he will vote to put the City under the 201 fees and then the Districts can fight it out amongst themselves. He added they (School Districts) are taxing the people of Chula Vista to make up for the amounts of money lost for not collecting fees in other communities for the past several years. There is unfairness in the scheduling of these fees. In answer to Board member Nick Aguilar's question, Councilman Malcolm stated that it was inexcusable for the Districts not to have collected $3 million in developers' fees (apartments in San Ysidro) for the past 6 years, plus not getting fees from National City and Imperial Beach, and gaining interest on all of that money. Mrs. Bauer commented that they need to take a look on this as community fees and not developers' fees. She discussed the number of students that were not housed in Chula Vista that are housed in trailers, terms of lunch hours being staggered, the overcrowding of schools. She added that within three to five years, Sweetwater will be able to build their first high school. Mrs. Ruth Chapman, Board member, Sweetwater Union referred to the industrial developments in National City, noting that many of the owner of these businesses are living in Chula Vista. d. Report Regarding Enrollment Projections Superintendent Lou Beall submitted a report regarding the enrollment and facility needs, noting the increases for the years 1984-1991. The report addresses the high priority of housing students without having to go to double sessions, crowding or increasing class size. It is a struggle and developer fees are one way in which these problems can be solved. He added that the developers' fees for Chula Vista City School District has remained the same but construction costs are going up. Minutes - 6 - January 27, 1986 City Council/School District Councilman Malcolm responded that if National City can help with developers' fees by going into Redevelopment funds, perhaps the City should look into that avenue also. Superintendent Trujillo stated Chula Vista can do this legally. Mr. Trujillo also noted the meetings held with Chula Vista staff for a joint maintenance yard and the use of redevelopment funds for school constructions. Superintendent Beall noted there is a lot of money in redevelopment and this could be made available for the construction of schools - it is up to the City Council. Councilman Malcolm commented it is not up to the City Council to go to the School Districts with this type of issue, it is up to the School Districts to figure out legally how to request this from the Council. Quality businesses cannot be brought into Chula Vista unless there is a high quality of schools and they are not overcrowded. Superintendent Trujillo noted that there should be more meetings with top-level officials rather than staff since staff does not have the power to make those types of decisions. Superintendent Beall suggested hiring a consultant jointly, City and School Districts, to work on the redevelopment monies issues. Mayor Cox said this will be scheduled for discussion at the next joint meeting. 3. MELLO/ROOS SCHOOL FACILITIES Mr. George Simpson, EastLake Project Manager for Infrastructure Planning and Finance, introduced Attorney Max Brown. They have been retained to assist the City on the implementation of the EastLake Public Facilities Financing plan. They started this project last August. For the past month they have been studying the issue of financing schools within the EastLake area. They have meet with District staffs and are recommending the formation of individual community districts under the Mello/Roos legislation to finance EastLake I and II developments. Mr. Simpson noted that there are four general steps that are necessary for this undertaking: (1) a petition from the property owners (EastLake); (2) the School Boards must adopt a resolution of intention to establish the district; (3) the School District conducts a public hearing and proceeds with the formation of the District; (4) School District conducts an election on the levy of the special taxes; (5) bonds are issued in conjunction with the school construction program. Minutes - 7 - January 27, 1986 City Council/School District Mr. Simpson added that there are time constraints that must be met for the 1987 tax rolls all of this must be done prior to August 10. EastLake is ready to submit the petition now. If the School Districts can consider this at their February Board meetings and take some action, it can get ~nder way immediately. EastLake developer will advance all necessary funds each school board determines sufficient to compensate the Board for all costs incurred to create the districts. Mr. Brown stated they are now in the process of reviewing this entire proposal and will be willing to come to the Districts to explain the details of the procedures to them. Board Member' Sharon Giles stated that she heard a presentation on the Mello/Roos legislation by Mr. William Stookey, Chairman, Board of Directors, Wildan Associates. Mr. Stookey informed the audience of the pitfalls associated with the Mello/Roos Financing plan. The City of Oceanside had trouble with this f'inancing - most of the new home buyers in that City were shocked to find out how much this special tax cost them. Mrs. Giles added she is not anxious to be on any Board that would have to foreclose on homes due to the non-payment of this special tax. Board Member Joe Cummings stated he, too, was at the seminar conducted by Mr. Stookey and noted that in every case, Mello/Roos was enacted by the property owner before anyone went to live there. The new homeowners never enacted the Mello/Roos. He also stated he would not want to be on any Board that would have to foreclose on homes. Board Member Penny Allen said she would like to get more background information on Mello/Roos prior to the time it comes to their meeting for action. Board Member Lita Davis added she, too, would like all the pros and cons on this issue. Councilwoman McCandliss noted that the Council's actions in approving EastLake development was a condition that all facilities would be built. One concern was whether or not the Mello/Roos Financing Plan would cover the funding of these facilities. The question is whether the School District would want the developer to build the facilities through the Mello/Roos Plan or have an assessment district. Minutes 8 January 27, 1986 city Council/School District 4. SCHOOLS/CITY LIBRARY SERVICES City Manager Goss stated this item has been pulled. The report is being revised and more information on the service will be sent to the Districts. 5. REQUEST OF SWEETWATER UNION HIGH TO BAN VENDING VEHICLES ADJACENT TO HIGH SCHOOL GROUNDS City Attorney Harron explained that it has come to his attention that children are running from the schools to the vending vehicles with buses coming into the area at the same time. The vending vehicles by elementary schools have been eliminated and now Superintendent Trujillo would like the same done for the high schools. Attorney Harron said it would be his recommendation to pass a total ban on vending vehicles by all school areas and will be bringing an ordinance back to the City Council to accommodate that ban. Superintendent Trujillo commented that the PTA is also concerned about vending vehicles near the schools - it is a perception more than anything else. Councilman Malcolm noted the Council voted it down at one particular time. He referred to the 500 foot distance for vending vehicles proposed by the Council for the elementary School Districts indicated he would like to see some type of compromise made here. Board Member Chapman said she would like a chance to look at that issue since the Sweetwater Board had not been apprised of this. 6. GENERAL COMMENTS Board Member Allen commended the City on the Interpretlye Center. Plans are geared toward making the Center one in which school children would find enjoyable and educational it will be an outstanding Center. Mayor Cox noted it is the project for the 75th Anniversary of the City. At some future meeting, he would like to speak to the District about staffing a part-time person to work at the Interpretive Center. Board Member Cummings stated he serves on several committees and everyone is discussing what to do with the lottery monies. Lottery monies will go to the County and be passed on to the District based on population. Minutes 9 January 27, 1986 city Council/School District Superintendent Beall stated he likes the idea of using Redevelopment monies to finance school construction and would like to see this pursued. Board Member Bauer complimented the secretaries in the Districts and the City Clerk in the preparation of the agenda for today's meeting and for the refreshments served. Councilman Moore stated there will be a grand opening premier scheduled for March 2 at the Bayfront to show the medallion and the Chula Vista Historical Book. Each member of the District will be sent an invitation to attend. Councilman Malcolm questioned whether senior citizen housings were being charged the developers' fees. Business Administrator Linn stated they were. Superintendent Trujillo complimented the Council on the Montgomery annexation. Councilwoman McCandliss wanted a listing of individual school capacities and their current enrollments. Mayor Cox noted the following propositions on the June ballot: non-partisan election; "deep pocket"; general obligation bonds; vehicle "in lieu" fees; and the issue of bonds for libraries and parks. Mayor Cox thanked everyone for their attendance at today's meeting and announced that the next meeting will be hosted by the Sweetwater Union High School District. ADJOURNMENT AT 6:25 p.m. City Clerk 0734C