HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 1994/01/04
Tuesday, January 4, 1994
4:00 p.m.
". declare under penalty of perjury that I am
em~!oyed by the Ci"t,: of C;-:,l;;J VistCl in tile
O"ff.ce of t;H~ C~t\; r;>:);,,!: ,:",~:.l .. "'l'~'-" ] ,,,(''v'. ..
tf: A",7.; "-',~.,./~t,~,.",:':.. -~'""'.~".""'~I-,.::, ""Ju::~. i ~,r.J~j.8:,J
n~s "'!.::~C.l~"4/~..".Jd...,0 vrt 1__11C L,i,:Jlc,':n Bo~-'{d u""
the PubHc S r~ic s 8u:L.Hns Q;'id"~t Ci'~~ Hail on . Coun~il ChaI?b.ers
DATED~ /..2. ~d T SIGNED C /1_. ""'or Pubhc Semces BUlldmg
-'--""
Re
Council
CAll. TO ORDER
1.
ROLL CALL:
Councilmembers Fox _, Horton _, Moore _, Rindone _, and Mayor
Nader _
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO TIlE FLAG. SILENr PRAYER
3.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
December 7, 1993 (City Council Meeting) and December 7, 1993
(Special Joint Meeting of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency).
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF TIlE DAY:
a. Oath of office:
Civil Service Commission - James Monaghan and William Winters;
Growth Management Oversight Commission - James Kell;
Library Board of Trustees - Constance Clover-Byram.
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items 5 through 14)
The staff recommendations regarding the following items listed under the Consent Calendar will be enacted by the
Council by one motion without discussion unless a Councilmember, a member of the publU: or CiLy staff requests
that the item be pulled for discussion. If you wish to speak on one of these items, please fill out a -Request to
Speak Form- available in the lobby and submit it to the CiLy Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete the green form
to speak in favor of the staff recommendation; complete the pink form to speak in opposition to the staff
recommendation.) Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be discussed after Board and Commission
Recommendations and Action Items. Items pulled by the public will be the first items of business.
5. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
a. Letter formally requesting that a public hearing be granted to the homeowners of Bayona
regarding development of homes in their immediate area that do not adhere to the original
master plan for the area - Bayona Homeowners Alliance, 954 Norella Street, Chula Vista,
CA 91910; and, Homayoun and Oralia Nabizadeh, 949 Norella Street, Chula Vista, CA
91910. It is recommended that the letter be received and acknowledged and that staff be
directed to report back to Council after meeting with the area residents.
6.A.
ORDINANCE 2579
ADOPTING AN INTERIM PRE-SR-125 DEVELOPMENTIMPACfFEE (second
readin~ and adoption) - On 11/9/93, Council held a public hearing to
amend the Eastern Area Development Impact Fee for Streets (Trans-DIF)
and establishment of an interim pre-SR-125 Development Impact Fee.
Following the hearing, Council approved both items with the condition that
new fees or revised fees not be collected until 1/1/95. Staff recommends
Council place the ordinances on second reading and adoption. (Director
of Public Works) Continued from the meeting of 12/14/93.
B.
ORDINANCE 2580
AMENDING ORDINANCE 2251 RELATING TO A TRANSPORTATION
DEVELOPMFNfIMPACfFEE TO PAY FOR TRANSPORTATIONFAOUTIES
IN TIlE OTY'S EASTERN AREA (second readin~ and adoption)
Agenda
-2-
January 4, 1994
7. ORDINANCE 2583 AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2577, REZONING TI-IE 5.8 ACRE
PARCEL LOCATED AT TI-IE SOUTI-IWEST CORNER OF TI-IIRD AVENUE
AND -.]" SlREET FROM C-O, OFFICE COMMERCIAL AND R-1, SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO C-C-P, CEN1RAL COMMERCIAL, PRECISE PLAN,
TO AMEND CERTAIN PRECISE PLAN STANDARDS THEREOF (second
readin~ and adoption) - Council set a public hearing date for 12/7/93 to
reconsider the General Plan and Rezoning application of American Stores,
Inc. for 5.8 acres located at the comer of Third and "J" Street. After
conducting the necessary hearing, Council voted to let their previous action
approving the General Plan and rezoning stand as approved by their vote
on 11/2/93, and moved to amend the Precise Plan standards in accordance
with the ordinance. Staff recommends Council place the ordinance on
second reading and adoption. (Director of Planning)
8. ORDINANCE 2585 AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2146 WIlli RESPECT TO
IJMITATIONS ON TI-IE AMOUNT OF TAX INCREMENT REVENUES FROM
TI-IE BAYFRONTITOWN CENTRE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS,
AND AUTHORIZING INSTI1UI10N OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS TO
DETERMINE TI-IE VAIJDIlY HEREOF (second readin~ and adoption) - The
Redevelopment Agency issued $7 million in Tax Allocation Bonds for the
combined Bayfront/Town Centre Redevelopment Project Areas in 1979.
The bonds were refinanced in 1984 and again in 1986, decreasing the total
principal amount and annual debt service. Subsequent to that action,
however, tax revenues accruing from the Bayfront Project Area have been
reduced due to the Unitary Tax, transfer of major equipment by Rohr, Inc.,
and reduction in State subventions. In addition, the delay in the
development of the Midbayfront has not provided additional anticipated
revenues to date. Annual debt service on the bonds exceeds revenues
accruing from the Bayfront Project Area. The proposed refunding of the
tax increment bonds, taking advantage of currently low interest rates,
should reduce annual debt service and, consequently, reduce the Agency's
annual operating deficit for the Bayfront Redevelopment Project Area. Staff
recommends Council place the ordinance on second reading and adoption.
(Director of Community Development)
9. RESOLUTION 17346 APPROVING AN EXTENSION OF TI-IE AGREEMENT WIlli REMY &
lliOMAS FOR LEGAL CONSULTING SERVICES FOR TI-IE OTAY RANCH
PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING TI-IE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID
AGREEMENT - The extension is to review environmental documents for
compliance with CEQA; provide guidance of processing environmental
support documents to assure compliance with CEQA. Staff recommends
approval of the resolution. (Deputy City Manager Krempl)
10. RESOLUTION 17347 APPROVING AGREEMENT WIlli REMY & lliOMAS FOR IJTIGATION
REPRESENTATION SERVICES IN CONNECTION WIlli TI-IE CHAPPARAL
GREENS LAWSUIT, AND AUTHORIZING MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAME -
When the City of Chula Vista and County of San Diego approved the final
version of the Otay Ranch Project, part of the approval was an
indemnification agreement by OtayVista Associates, indemnifying approval.
Chapparal Greens and Daniel Tarr have sued the City, the County, and
Baldwin alleging inadequacies in the final program EIR and/or violations
of CEQA. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Assistant City
Attorney Rudolf)
Agenda
-3-
January 4, 1994
11. RESOLUTION 17348 APPROVING A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) WIlli TIIE
CITIES OF LA MESA, POWAY, NATIONAL CI1Y, AND IMPERIAL BEACH
FOR PURPOSES OF A COORDINATED APPROACH TO REGULATING
CABLE TELEVISION RATES AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS TIIEREFOR-
The cities of Chula Vista, La Mesa, Poway, National City, and Imperial
Beach have been working together to develop ajoint approach to reviewing
and regulating cable television rates. The cities are proposing entering into
an MOU in order to hire a cable television consultant that will provide
services to the group of cities. Staff recommends approval of the
resolution. (Director of Finance) 4/5th's vote required.
12. RESOLUTION 17349 ACCEPTING CALIFORNIA STATE UBRARYMATCHlNG FUNDS AWARDED
TO TIIE CHULA VISTA UTERACY TEAM, APPROPRIATING FUNDS, AND
AMENDING FISCAL YEAR 1993/94 BUDGET TO INCLUDE .25 FUll TIME
EMPLOYEE POSITIONS - The California State Library has announced that
California Library Services Act funds are available to supplement funds
raised locally by literacy programs which were originally awarded five-year
start-up grants through the California Literacy Campaign, and are now in
their sixth year or beyond. The amount of funds awarded is based on a
match of $1 for every $4.51 raised locally and spent during Fiscal Year
(FY) 1993/94. Accepting the grant will provide $25,838 in FY 1993/94 to
the Chula Vista Literacy Team. The funds cannot supplant existing funds.
Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Library Director) 4/5th's
vote required.
13. RESOLUTION 17350 AMENDING RESOLUTION 16756 TO ADD APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS
FOR TIIE SECOND AMENDMENT TO TIIE AGREEMENT WIlli WALLACE,
ROBERTS AND TODD, INC. FOR PREPARATION OF A RESOURCE
ENHANCEMENT PLAN FOR TIIE OTAY RIVER VALLEY - On 8/25/92,
Council approved Resolution 16756 "Approving the second amendment to
the agreement with Wallace, Roberts and Todd, Inc. for expanded scope of
work, and authorizing acceptance of an agreement with the State Coastal
Conservancy Enhancement Plan for the Otay River Valley." The resolution
did not contain appropriating action due to staff oversight. In order for the
City to receive the grant funds on a reimbursement basis, the $8,000 must
be appropriated to PR-148 - Otay River Valley - State Grant. Staff
recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Parks and Recreation)
4/5th's vote required.
14. RESOLUTION 17351 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WIlli FRANK CHABOUDY FOR PROVISION
OF PROFESSIONAL TENNIS SERVICES AND FOR OPERATION OF TIIE
CHULA VISTA TENNIS CENTER, AND AlJIHORIZING MAYOR TO
EXECUTE SAME - The Chula Vista Tennis Center has been operated by a
tennis professional, Frank Chaboudy, since November 1985 under an
agreement with the City. A new agreement has been prepared to continue
his professional tennis services for three years. Staff recommends approval
of the resolution. (Director of Parks and Recreation)
* * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * *
Agenda
-4-
January 4, 1994
PUBIJC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law. If you wish to speak
to any item, please fill out the -Request to Speak Form- available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior
to the meeting. (Complete the green form to speak in favor of the staff recommendation; complete the pink form
to speak in opposition to the staff recommendation.) Comments are limited to five minutes per individual
15.
PUBIJC HEARING
16.
PUBIJC HEARING
CONSIDERING ORDINANCE ESTABIJSJ-llNG TELEGRAPH CANYON
SEWER. PUMPED FLOWS DEVELOPMENT IMPACf FEE (DIF) TO PAY FOR
SEWER. IMPROVEMENTS WITJ-llN TELEGRAPH CANYON SEWER. BASIN
AS A CONDITION OF ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS FOR
CONSTRUCTION IN THE TELEGRAPH CANYON SEWER. BASIN - On
10/20/92, the City established the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Development
Impact Fee. Based on the "Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin Improvement
and Financing Plan Amendment Incorporating Pumped Flows" a fee of
$560 per pumped EDU should be established. Staff recommends Council
continue the public hearin~ to the meetin~ of January 18, 1994. (Director
of Public Works) Continued from the meeting of 12/7/93.
TO CONSIDER THE PARTIAL WAIVER OF TRANSPORTATION
DEVELOPMENT IMPACf FEES FOR LOTS 5 AND 6 OF MAP 12267
(RANCHO DEL REY BUSINESS CENTER) - Jerome's Furniture Warehouse
proposes to locate in the Rancho del Rey Business Center which was
assessed Transportation Development Impact Fees (TDIF) through an
assessment district formed over the lots proposed for development. The
TDIF assessed in the assessment district was based upon an industrial use
for Lots 5 and 6. Jerome's Furniture is considered a commercial use which
is assessed at a higher rate. Jerome's has requested a waiver of fees based
upon SANDAG trip generation rates which indicate that a furniture store
generates less traffic than most industrial uses. Jerome's, therefore, has
requested a waiver of additional TDIF for their project. Staff recommends
approval of the resolution waiving the requirement for Jerome's Furniture
Warehouse to pay an estimated $177,840 in additional TDIF. (Director of
Public Works)
RESOLUTION 17352 APPROVING WAIVER OF ADDITIONAL TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT
IMPACf FEES FOR LOTS 5 AND 6 OF MAP 12267 (RANCHO DEL REY
BUSINESS CENTER)
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This is an opportunity for the general public to address the City Council on any subject matter within the Council's
jurisdU:tion that is not an item on this agenda.. (State law, however, generally prohibits the City Council from
taking action on any issues not included on the posted agenda.) If you wish to address the Council on such a
subject, please complete the yellow -Request to Speak Under Oral Communications Form- available in the lobby
and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Those who wish to speak, please give your name and address
for record purposes and follow up action. Your time is limited to three minutes per speaker.
Agenda
-5-
January 4, 1994
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
This is the time the City Cowu:il will consider items which have been forwarded to them for consideration by one
of the city's Boards, Commissions and/or Committees.
17. RESOLUTION 17353 SUPPORTING CALIFORNIANS FOR PARKS AND WILDUFE BOND ACf OF
1994 - It is recommended that Council approve the resolution.
18. REPORT HOSTING AN INTERNATIONAL FRIENDSHIP FESTIVAL - On 9/24/91,
Council requested a report from the International Friendship Commission
regarding the .possibility of hosting an International Friendship Festival
similar to the one hosted by the City of EI Cajon in 1991. It is
recommended that the City not proceed with hosting an International
Friendship Festival at the present time. (International Friendship
Commission)
ACTION ITEMS
The items listed in this section of the agenda are expected to elicit substantial discussions and deliberations by the
Council, staff, or members of the general public. The items will be considered individually by the Cowu:il and staff
recommendations may in certain cases be presented in the alternative. Those who wish to speak, please fill out
a -Request to Speak" form available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Public
comments are limited to five minutes.
19.A. RESOLUTION 17354 REQUESTING THE SAN DIEGO COUNIY WATER AUTI-lORI1Y TO
DEVELOP AND ADOPT A POUCY WHICH PROVIDES FOR PRIORI1Y
ALLOCATION OF WATER SUPPUES TO THOSE OTIES VOLUNTARILY
IMPLEMENTING WATER CONSERVATION MEASURES - On 11/9/93,
Council directed staff to pursue development of a policy to provide priority
water allocation to qualifying industries during times of drought, in order
to insure the least possible interruption of water supplies to those
industries which would be most impacted and/or are targeted recruitment
prospects. The direction stemmed from a proposal made to the Interagency
Water Task Force at their 9/10/93 meeting. It was suggested that
eligibility criteria be established for qualifying businesses and that the City
work with the water districts to assure no net negative impact on water
availability by reducing General Plan density, with exemptions for
developers independently pursuing water conservation/availability
measures. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Director of
Community Development and City Attorney)
B. RESOLUTION 17355 REQUESTING THE SWEETWATER AUTI-lORI1Y AND THE OTAY WATER
DISTRICf TO IMMEDIATELY DEVELOP AND ADOPT A POUCY PROVIDING
FOR PRIORI1Y ALLOCATION OF WATER SUPPUES TO QUAUFYING
BUSINESSES WITHIN THE 01Y DURING TIMES OF DROUGHT
20. REPORT UPDATE ON SOUD WASTE DISPOSAL ISSUES - An oral report will be
given by staff.
ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
This is the time the City Council will discuss items which have been removed from the Consent Calendar. Agenda
items pulled at the request of the public will be considered prior to those pulled by Councilmembers. Public
comments are limited to five minutes per individual
Agenda
-6-
January 4, 1994
OTI-IER BUSINESS
21. CIlY MANAGER'S REPORT(S)
a. Scheduling of meetings.
22. MAYOR'S REPORT(S)
a. Enforcement of graffiti abatement. Continued from the meeting of 12/14/93.
b. Ratification of appointment: Jorge F. Castillo - Cultural Arts Commission. Continued from
the meeting of 12/14/93.
c. Reconsideration of San Diego Wal-Mart lawsuit settlement. Continued from the meeting
of 12/14/93.
d. Endorsement of Three Strikes You're Out Initiative.
e. Sexual Harassment Policy - Meeting with employee representatives.
f. Direction to staff to bring back Mixed Use Zoning Ordinance for Broadway area for Council
consideration.
g. Support for strong California Drug Asset Forfeiture Laws.
23. COUNCIL COMMENfS
Councilman Fox
a. Strategies for obtaining regional cooperation toward capitalizing on NAFTA opportunities.
Continued from the meeting of 12/14/93.
Councilman Rindone
b. Designation of Bob Fox as alternate to Interim Solid Waste Commission.
ADJOURNMENf
The City Council will meet in a closed session immediately following the Council meeting to discuss:
Instructions to negotiators pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6 - Chula Vista Employees
Association (CVEA) , Western Council of Engineers (WCE) , Police Officers Association (POA) ,
International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) , Executive Management, Mid-Management, and
Unrepresented. Continued from the meeting of 12/14/93.
Pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - Christopher vs. the City of Chula
Vista.
Pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - Schaefer vs. the City of Chula
Vista.
Pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - Clifton vs. the City of Chula
Vista.
The meeting will adjourn to (a closed session and thence to) the Regular City Council Meeting on January
11, 1994 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.
A meeting of the Redevelopment Agency will be held immediately following the City Council meeting.
COUNCIL INFORMATION MEMO
December 28, 1993
To:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
Subject:
John Goss, City Manager /7,/J
Robert A. Leiter, Director of Planning rJ ~ M /,srrc.-
Written communication- concerns expressed by the residents of the Rancho Del
Rey neighborhood known as Bayona about the introduction of a new housing
product on the undeveloped portion of their neighborhood.
Via:
From:
On August 30, 1991, the Bayona neighborhood, which encompass neighborhoods 1561 and 1680
(see Exhibit B), received design review approval by the Zoning Administrator. Subsequently,
40 homes were build by McMillan but, due to fInancial hardship, the neighborhood was not
completed, leaving 51 of the 91 lots undeveloped.
In September 1993, Kaufman and Broad, a development company, presented to staff a proposal
to develop above mentioned undeveloped portion of neighborhood 1561, Bayona. As part of the
initial staff recommendations it was suggested to have a meeting with the existing Bayona
residents to introduce the new developer and the new product.
On December 8, 1993, the applicant held a meeting ~re the new product and literature about
the builder was presented. At the meeting two primary issues were raised; the architectural
compatibility of the new product with the existing homes and the price of the new units in
relationship to what they had paid for their homes.
On December 14, 1993, and after the above mentioned introductory meeting, the area residents
app~in front of the City Council to express their concern about the new and different housing
product being proposed for the undeveloped portion of their neighborhood (see Exhibit A). They
stated that the new homes needed to be architecturally compatible with their existing homes in
order to maintain the character and value of their neighborhood.
Additional correspondence was also received by the Planning Department citing similar concerns
(see attached letters).
On December 14, 1993 Council directed the staff to meet with the Bayona residents to acquaint
them with the corresponding planning process, including any appeal procedures. A meeting with
applicant and a separate meeting with the area residents have produ~ architectural refmements
to the project that, according to the applicant, are satisfactory to some of the Bayona residents.
However, a meeting with all of the residents have been schedule for January 5, 1994 at 6:00
pm. at the Rancho del Rey Information Center to present the revised design and obtain input.
After the January 5, 1993 meeting, and based on the input provided at the meeting, the Zoning
Administrator will render a decision. This decision may be appealed by the applicant or the area
residents to the Planning Commission and subsequently to the City Council.
f ~,
. "
~
~
~
~
t
.((
~
~
~
~
\\\
--
.~
~
~
~
-z
~
~
'"
o ~~
-:z \J n.\
h\. -:I
U) O~
~ :7::t
~.
~
o
I-
<C
o
o
...J
~
W
~
~
en
i51
=!3
=~2~~~8a=
-:.~.~~~~..-:-:.":.
....Ift"'...."'......
... ..
0011100
.........
ON..........
.....
.....!....
888888
....""'........""
.;..,;..;
.. ....
~ 111.~i!iiiiii ii!!i
... ...................... .....
.~ c...~"'.~"'....N.'" .""."
;; 111!------~-- -----1
.1 u 111~.8...080228 "'00"'0
; ! ~ ~!&:S&S&&& ~S~~&
",,,,..11'\.0.'" ~...,:.....
..
iiiiii
......
...............
..
~ ------
000000
"'00"'0'"
.iiiiii
..
I!\'=" ~...!..............o.
i .'" ......0......,.....
... ...... ...
z
o
-
~
c(
(.)
I...
w
."~
-
o
==~~::I
.. .. ..
...............
."'_.0'_
.. .. ..
..
1.1.....i...........o....
o .. ....... .Ift...............,........
. .............""'.........,....
.....................................
.. . . .
" '
..
!
..
...
...
","""0"'''''
00.....,......
...............
.............
==5::1
..................
{
t
-
-
~
en
i
\ . ",
.. -......
.-l
~
l
10m
JI~
o..;~ t-
5~
E)W
i
.
I ~ ..1
2&. t~1
...,,,l~'J~
J!J~~!.Ii
~tt~!:~tig~
~MfiSC")C')~..
........................
, .
CORRESPONDENCE
RECEIVED
BY THE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SA VONA HOMEOWNERS ALLIANCE
954 NORELLA STREET
CHULA VISTA, CA 91910
Dee 1 1, 1 993
Dear Mayor Tim Nader;
Cc: Mayor Tim Nader
Cc: Councilman Leonard Moore
Cc: Councilman Jerry Rindone
Cc: Councilwoman Shirley Horton
Cc: Councilman Robert Fox
Cc: Design Review Coordinator J. Luis Hernandez
(") ("')
~~
-<-<
("') <:)
r- .."
m(J
::::0-.-
=" --
~c..::
(,/') r-
S,~'
, ''''
-r: ;~'..
c=:; ::'.;
m ):;..
~
:u
f'1'1
C')
fT1
-
<
fTI
C
~
-
..
;a
-
,h;.
N
As homeowners of the Bayona development in Rancho Del Rey, we have been
coalesced into action by the imminent plans by Kaufman & Broad to develop homes
in our immediate area that do not adhere to the original master plan for the area
The master plan called for the eventual completion of Bayona by the McMillan
Development, Inc. as a architecturally harmonious tract of homes that suggested
Mediterranean influences. The newly proposed homes to be built by Kaufman &
Broad in no way retain this architectural harmony: They are of an entirely different
conceptual origin. differing in colorations, geometry, materials, etc.
The proposed homes, if they are completed as proposed would have severely
negative affects on the aesthetics as well as the uniqueness of the Bayona community.
We are taking this opportunity to formally ask that a public hearing be granted to us,
the homeowners of Bayona. We the homeowners of Bayona have also signed the
attached petition form to demonstrate our conviction that this is indeed a matter of
great importance to us. We look forward to hearing from you as to when a hearing
can be arranged
Cordially,
Th( Bayona Home7~ce
I
f
\
~. r'~'L" l}'f:';J'0{~:;,)t, ,,;
\.'\! ~"l~;I i ~~~\,J
CC' ~ ~==(<j)
Iff! ~~.
8: ~7~~,
".""'''. ''''~A' . llI;I'C~1 .N.'S'
"',' ,''''c'' . ..~ ",' ,
''''':it.' " " .
1'1.~'~ "
~/tlJ9~
s/~
tf?" <-
~-/
BA YONA HOMEOWNERS ALLIANCE
954 NORELLA STREET
CHULA VISTA. CA 91910
26.
27.
28.
29.
30. '
31..
32
33.
34.
~~cJ-
,>
t",.:
.;....:".>
>~ ..,.
,<
tiv'~:~~'::::":i~':~~o':' {/_'i.~
!I
A
" ..
"'..,,~:<:,-..~
:I,ZII
"f:.
;,.
,41
,~
......'...."........
..;"~.
...:.
/1.
...,~-
"
-~:-
.~............V.
-.;>". "
~'-'~:" -. .
..:~.
....C+4_
"0"-
,,;!1!1
./.
. .,,,, I,~'"
I'.", ,..,:;"~~".f"
.~ .~ ,-~
{;~;}~~".
~'o>;(..,,, ........;,.JJII
'J'i!":JI
~..
"""'>1\'.
,...
,.,.
.~.
-
,...:S,;.
e';,.,.,.
r:
" ;""
~.:
p~.",..;~
a/
.~":-j'
l"
I
~.~.';..,
, -~,?,:~'f~,~,::,:'.
.'~-':!: .
'ii'"
.~.
'"
~,
I"'..
.'~~~
. 't'1.~:
.';''i~;',..
,~.~.,;.;.
. I.. 0't,. '.
..,
..~ ....
..
f4,,-'
f .
f' .
r...;'.
';.~.-
, '''',,'.
.('....'.
r~<'
"'i .
Wt:-.,..
1,:
I*'.:',;~
"
...
IlL.
~
,.,.
~.
.
83.
84.
85.
. i
86. \
87. .1 t/<~
88. ' \ 1{) . ~
89. '
90.
91.
9
93.
94.
95.
96.
97.
98.
99.
100.
1Ol.
102-
103.
104.
,.-
3~'J
RECEIVED
To: City of Chula Vista
Mayor, City Council
and Planning Commission
December.15,1993
"93 rEC 15 P4:41
CITY OF CHULA viSTA
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
I am a home owner at 949 Norella street in the Bayona
community. When my wife and I purchased the home in June of
this year, we were assured by a representative of the McMillan
Company that they were going to continue to build more McMillan
houses (Bayona Phase II) on the empty lots of our street. However,
on December 7, 1993, McMillan informed us that the lots were sold
to a different company, Kaufman and Broad. Kaufman and Broad are
intending to build a different style of homes in our community
which will be called "California Castille," a completely different
title from "Bayona." Furthermore, the proposed "California
Castille" is going to split our community in half, on the same
street! This seems so awkward and incredible to us. The new
proposed homes will also be about 30 to 60 thousand dollars less
expensive than the homes in the Bayona community. Our homes are
of a contemporary Mediterranean style where the proposed homes
tend to look more traditional with dark brick and stone masonary,
raised enclosed front porches, flat tile roofs, and they are
smaller in square footage. The difference would be very obvious!
The City of Chula Vista must stop the new proposal and offer
a similar type of construction to the existing houses. We, the
people of Bayona, are angry and frustrated over this matter. We
are going to lose on the value of our homes. We are in favor of
new construction but not if the new houses are not similar to the
cc.~ 7,J~ . ('I) .
0-: ~~ .
0~~~~
~"''''1,
"~iJ'
::L:~ ill,;, @ ,~~,.~~~ 11 f/'('f~A" " "t~" I
~))1jB .\ttSt~~I'-"!IlI II
~-5
s
;f:rv ;#;7'1
-I- 0~ ~~.J-~
existing Bayona community. As our city officials, we urge and
trust that you will help us in this matter.
/ Sincerely'! d' 0
;- !fJ~S0~'P:1IIV~~.
~-t? ,{/J~X..u:J
Homayoun Nabizadeh
Oralia Nabizadeh
949 Norella st.
C . V ., Ca. 91 91 0
~-~
-
I
'1
950 Norella Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
December 12, 1993
DEe 1 3 1993
City of Chula Vista
Planning Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
. r.." .,
I _~""".'''.~''~
Dear Mr. Hernandez:
The proposed development for Rancho Del Rey is not compatible with the
appearance of the existing Bayona homes. This will be especially
apparent on Norella Street where the two dissimilar projects will
coexist on the same street. Also, a single oddball house has been
proposed for the north end of Esla street. This house will literally
stand out like a sore thumb if built as proposed.
As a Bayona homeowner, I welcome the completion of the Bayona project.
However, the proposal should be denied until the following problems
can be addressed:
. The proposed "stone and brick masonry trim" and "elevated
covered front porches" are totally out of character for the
neighborhood. All of Rancho Del Ray is done in a Spanish
motif.
. The proposed flat concrete roof tiles should be replaced
with curved tiles in the same color, size, and shape as all
the other homes in the Bayona project.
. The new houses should be painted in color schemes agreeable
with the existing homes on the same street.
. The new construction should have landscaping that fits in
with the landscaping of the rest of the street.
Those of us who bought into the Bayona development agreed to extensive
and detailed CC&Rs because we enjoyed the harmonious look of a master
planned community. We are concerned that this project may severely
reduce the property value of our investments. Please study the
project's compatibility with and impact upon existing homes before
approving it. Thank you.
;::!~y~
M~imkin
--
Case No: DRC-94-10
'"
\..u a1
~~
8lF
<.
~
ESLA
c
~
"'-
-J-.
c~
cu L-
~~
Cl.-'C:)
~\j
'-
--4-
..
"
-$.0,)-+
\\ * ~
'-.) E
\11 ~ i.
c ~ 0
#' 'r- U
~ !I\
- \.) '" ~
oJ t. !
......,a
:3 ~ ~
~ ..r~
-; u .4-
9 4:. "'"
""t; ~-*
~ ~
tS
~
f-
VI
~
'i)
~
-
c-;;
{)
'" ~
tF
,Q
~~..
3 ~ .t'"t
~ 2 + ~
6.l;_ -+-
11\ _.f. ~ Vl
~- "-
~. - '- Q.) t1'
oJ { ~ .-::;,
~ ;- + '-
QI oJ '- Q
f5~ 3 C
f
~
d ~
~~~
"'--~o
'- -'=.
t;;
'-
QJ
-t-:
t::.
4.J
i-
4
L..L
'-
-cs
E\
'It
L.
o
;-
l- ~ ~
A,) _ .
-I-:....a+
)( :! V\
Qj 4,.1 I _
4J V\ ~
~ ~ ~
r-
. .
. [tEe 16 ' ~3
07:26AM ROI1r SOUTH BAY
\..
(
P.l
December 13, 1993
Mayor Tim Nader
276 Fourth Ave.
Chula vista, CA 91910
Dear Mayor Nader,
We are writin; to you in regards to the notice we received on the
site plan and architecture proposed construction of 51 sin;le
family dwellings (Case No. DRC-94-10) on the remaining lots of
the subdivision presently known as the Neighborhood 1561 (Bayona)
in the Rancho Del Rey Planned Community. Before you consider
this plan, please hear out our concerns as one of the Bayona
Homeowners.
"'-~ri.:::~:ON
w~noU!lad.
Time '. ~
1 Other.
Last wednesday, December 8, we (the Bayona Homeowners) were
invited to preview the proposed plan in the Bayona neighborhood
by Kaufman and Broad and the McMillin qroup at Rancho Del Ray.
To our amazement, the plans and architectural designs of the
proposed dwellings are completely differently, they don't have
the same style, quality and features as the houses that are
already built. The proposed dwellings are much smaller than the
previously approved plans in the Bayona neighborhood. Kaufman
and Broad will start building these completely different houses
from where the Bayona development had stopped which is half of
Norella Street (see exhibit 1). As you can see from exhibit 2
(desiqns of present ho~es in the Bayona nei9hborhood), the plans
of Kaufman and Broad does not blend with our present
neiqhborhood.
As a military family who's been stationed overseaS for over 8
years, we were excited to finally settle down in a Quite
community like Rancho Del Rey. When we bought our house which
was in November 1992, we were never told by Rancho Del Rey's
sales representative, Jerrie Brizzie, that there might be
problems with the Bayona development. What we were told and led
to believe was that most of the houses were already sold (all the
lots in Nor.lla St.) except for 3 or 4 houses. When we finally
arrived from overseas and saw our house for the first time, we
were surprised that only half of Norella Street was developed. .
That was when we found out that Rancho Del Ray was havinq
tinancial problems due to their partner, HomeFed. We understood
the situation and we didn't mind that MCMillin s~opped the
development in our nei9hborhood for the mean time. We were never
informed that the McMillin qroup might not continue with the
approved Bayona plans.
DEe 16 '93 07: 27AI'1 ROler SOUTH BA'(
~
l
P.2
Now that McMillin has bought HomFed's share, they are bringing in
Kaufman and Broad to continue the project in our neighborhood
with completely different plans from what we were presented
initially when we were buying our houses. NOW that development
is starting again, our main concern is the difference in style,
quality an~ features of the proposed dwellings from the present
Spanish style houses in our neighborhood. The proposed
developmen~ will start in the m1dale of Norella St. The prcpcsea
houses also have a price range of below $200,000. As you can aee
with axhibit 3 (price ran;e of present homes in the Bayona
neiqhborhood) the average value of houses is about $230,000
beoause of the unique style and quality of our homes. picture a
street (Norella st) in which half is Bayona quality and half of
it is completely different. What dO you think will happen if
your house 1s valued at $230,000 and then another house down the
road is only valued at $180,000? If the proposed plan of Kaufman
and Broad is approved, the value of all the houses in the Bayona
neighborhood will go down. We are hoping that McMillin will
reconsider and will go ahead with the previously approved plan in
the Bayona neighborhood.
Please, we urge you to consider our conoerns end the rest of the
Bayona neiqhborhood. We voioed out our ooncerns to the McMillin
representative, the senior Vice-President in Charge of Marketing,
and to the Kaufman and Broad representative during our meeting
last December S. We were all told that the McMillin group will
get back with us in regards to our concerns, but up to now we
haven't heard anything from them. We are all upset and
disgruntled about the change in plans. We were misinformed ana
misled by the Sales Department of Rancho Del Rey and they are
playing around with our biggest asset - our homes! So you are
our last resort, please hear our concerns and help us. Before
you approve the proposed plan of Kaufman and Broad, have an open
forum with the Bayona homeowners or just visit the site and
you'll see in person what the proposed change in the plan will do
to our neighborhood.
Sincerely,
~, fZo~ &&n)
~Vt~
Mr. and Mrs. Florante Sabino
958 Norella st.
Chula Vista, CA
91910
-
J
j
December 13,91910
Mr. J. Luis Hernandez
Design Review Coordinator/Associate planner
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Planning Department
276 Fourth Ave
Chula vista, ca. 91910
Dear Mr. Hernandez;
Last Wednesday, December 8, we were invited to preview the proposed
architectural design for the new dwellings to be built in our neighborhood by
Kaufman and broad of San Diego Inc.. At this time we would like to expressed
three reasons why this proposed 51 single family dwellings should not be
approved by the City..
1. We strongly believed that the existing design is unique and contribute to
the enhancement of the City.. Our houses features excellent architectural design
qualities. We strongly suggest that the amenities our houses have be consider
before approving this new development proposal. Our houses as we understand
were design by an architectural firm who took the time to analyzed, researched
and studied the City's residential neighborhoods.
2. As homeowners our main concern lies on the inferior quality of design
and inferior quality on the product, m&ans cheaper houses, which translate to a
depreciation of our properties value.
3. As you are aware, on October 18, 1990, your department approved the
Bayona development, and for reasons unknown to us this proposed and
approved development has not been completed. We want you to exercise your
design review power to maintain the quality of our neighborhood. .
.*' .-
l.
~
Page 2
Mr. Hernandez
Our understanding is that Kaufman and Broad will finish the development, but we
do not see the same product. At this time we urge you not to approved
Kaufman and Broad proposed project.
~ery truly y~urs j> ,
A'WI\ i?rtl~ Mlt7
a 0 Heman
Bayona Homeowner
00: Mayor
Tim Nader
Council
Leonard Moore
Jerry Rindone
Shirley Horton
Robert Fox
C_15-93
W~.L1
~~:"o
'-
----
;--
Mayor 'rim Naoer:
276 4th Avenue
Chula Vista, CA. 91910
Dear Mr. Nader:
l
hf--:-:--::::-:-:-:-m
IS ., [' :.. ..- '. ~.~!l
~-: . ~-(, i "'l~r{) I II
0~ .1.;.'.:'0.1 0 ~~.,) \":11120 Bsla Drive
. l.l... - -.. __.;_J crUla Vista. CA.
_...:.___ ____-- ~ December 15, 1993
91910
As a Bayona homeowner, my husband and I have concerns regarding
the proposed new homes to be built in our neighborhood. Aside
from our concerns regarding the value of our home investment,
we reQuest that you consider these issues: the proposed house~
have brick and stone masonry, raised enclosed front porches,
flat til~ roofs (va. barrel tiles) and other features which do
not blend with the Spanish style, Bayona homes: the color schemes
and landscaping wi1l not match our existing homes: and the fact
that we, the homeowners of Bayone, invested our hard-earned
money believing the neighborhood would develop with the same
high quality Bayona homes. At the time we were considering
buying our home, we were shown future blueprints and a video
of the Bayona home plans which left me with the impression of a
neighborhood one could be proud to be a part of because of the
dedication to enhancing the quality of homes. The current pro-
posed homes in our opinion, do not have the features which match
our Bayona home.
I thank you for your consideration regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
~d)CJ.41U~
Catherine Domin~uez
/
l
(
1 .
To: city of Chula Vista
Mayor, city Council
and Planning Commission
DEel ~ December .15,1993
iJ 1993
I am a home owner at 949 Norella street in the Bayona
community. When my wife and I purchased the home in June of
this year, we were assured by a representative of the McMillan
Company that they were going to continue to build more McMillan
houses (Bayona Phase II) on the empty lots of our street. However,
on December 7, 1993, McMillan informed us that the lots were sold
to a different company, Kaufman and Broad. Kaufman and Broad are
intending to build a different style of homes in our community-
which will be called "California Castille," a .completely different
title from "Bayona." Furthermore, the proposed "California
Castille" is going to split our community in half, on the same
street! This seems so awkward and incredible to us. The new
proposed homes will also be about 30 to 60 thousand dollars less
expensive than the homes in the Bayona community. Our homes are
of a contemporary Mediterranean style where the proposed homes
tend to look more traditional with dark brick and stone masonary,
raised enclosed front porches, flat tile roofs, and they are
smaller in square footage. The difference would be very obvious!
The city of Chula Vista must stop the new proposal and offer
a similar type of construction to the existing houses. We, the
people of Bayona, are angry and fr~strated over this matter. We
are going to lose on the value of our homes. We are in favor of
new construction but not if the new houses are not similar to the
'- ~
existing Bayona community. As our city officials, we urge and
trust that you will help us in this matter.
/ SinCerely,} ff...... ~ ,j
I /tf!~Y~9t17//7} N~,/A/
~V~~
Homayoun Nabizadeh
Oralia Nabizadeh
949 Norella st.
C. V ., Ca. 91 91 0
.-
.
~.
l'
December 16, 1993
Mayor and City Council
City of Chula Vista
Z76 Fourth Ave.
Chula Vista. CA 91910
Re: Bayona Development
900 Block of Norell a Street
We are concerned with the planned development of the Rancho Del Rey Bayona
development. The McMillen development has apparently sold its interest to the Kaufman
development company. We understand and are happy to see the area once again being
developed. Its good for the city as well as for the developer. Our concern lies with the
proposed development on Norella Street. The new developer has apparently decided to
not continue with a style that would blend in with the rest of the hom~s on our street.
(Norella Street still has half of the lots available for development. ) Our concerns are as
follows:
. Proposed homes have brick and stone masonry, raised enclosed front porced &
flat tile roofs. (We currently have the barrel tiles.) These features are totally out
of character for the Bayona neighborhood.
. The color schemes and landscaping will not match our existing homes.
. The transition is taking place in the middle of the street, as well as one of the
homes being placed next to a former model home at the corner of Esla & Rancho
Parkway.
We are asking that Norella Street be completed blending in with the the homes that
currently exist. We feel that there are so few of us that our voices might not be heard.
My family and 1 hope that this is not the case. We are asking for your help in having our
voices heard. We have lived in Chula Vista all our lives and have not ever had to ask City
Hall for help until now. Ifwe can provide you with any additional information please feel
free to contact us.
,
j
L...,.. ..
.0'
,.
We realize how busy your schedule is and appreciate your time in reviewing our request.
Sincerely.
1L1J~~ ·
L~lligr)q ~
968 Norella Street
Chula Vista, CA. 91910
Home #: 482-8268
Lee's Work #: 691-5518
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
a.
Item & 11/91
Meeting Date ~ I~
... /i - \p~
Ordinance .cJ? 1 Adopting an interim pr~1t-125
development impact fee (fIrst reading) ~<V ~
Ordinance ,),.f'~ t? Amending Ordin~~~ 1 of the City of
Chula Vista relating to a Transportatio~velopment Impact Fee
to pay for transportation facilities ~e City's Eastern Area (fIrst
reading) ~<vG
Director of Public wor~
City ManageU~ ~.~)-
Q.....-z
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_NoX)
b.
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
On November 9, 1993, Council held a public hearing regarding amending the Eastern Area
Development Impact Fee for Streets (Trans-DIF) and establishment of an interim pre-SR-125
Development Impact Fee. Following the hearing, Council approved both items with the
condition that new fees or revised fees not be collected until January 1, 1995.
Staff is now returning with new versions of the proposed ordinances that implement Council's
direction for a fIrst reading. The reason that these ordinances are presented for fIrst reading
is that they differ substantially from the previous ordinances and the City Attorney has
indicated that they need to be resubmitted for a fIrst reading.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the ordinances implementing the Interim SR-125
Development Impact Fee and amending the Transportation Development Impact Fee.
BOARDS AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable.
The Transportation Development Impact Fee (TransDIF) ordinance has been revised to adjust
the proposed fees based on the delay in increasing the fees until January 1, 1995, resulting in
a proposed fee increase from $3,815 to $3,988 per EDU The attached addendum to the
Engineers Report for the TransDIF shows how the revised fee amount was developed. The
major components of the adjustment in fee amount involve estimating the effects of inflation
based on a 4% inflation factor and estimating the effects of having a reduced pool of
participants in 1995, based on an estimate of 1,500 EDDs of building permits issued during
the next year. This is consistent with the methodology used in developing the interim SR-125
fee as presented at the November 9 hearing, and is consistent with growth estimates provided
by developers in testimony at the hearing.
Staff is aware that there may be some questions regarding these growth projections, given the
exceedingly slow growth rate experienced over the past few years. At the hearing, Council
directed staff to return in 9 months with a report regarding the actual growth experienced
t,-/
Page 2, Item {, ~'I~/A9 ~
Meeting Date 1~1 .
- .~
during this time. In this interim, staff will be working with a committee consisting of the City
staff and the developers to review the economic climate and to hire a consultant to assist in
obtaining outside funding. It is staff s intent to provide Council with a complete report at that
time, which identifies what the appropriate fee should be, and asking Council to enact that fee
(if it differs significantly from the proposed fee). Thus, the fees proposed will, if necessary,
be adjusted when staff returns with the report.
The significant change with respect to the interim SR-125 ordinance is regarding the
disposition of collected funds. Staff believes that the program proposed by the HNTB study
is sound, but represents one particular growth scenario. Should growth occur in a different
pattern, or if evolving traffic patterns suggest that different projects might solve traffic
problems more effectively, staff believes that there should be some flexibility in the ordinance
allowing for changes in programs, although such changes would only be made with Council
approval following a public hearing. An additional potential program change might be
fmancial participation in the toll road. Since any of the programs contemplated, including the
toll road participation, would be aimed at providing additional capacity in the circulation
system, staff does not believe this is a departure from the' intent of the adopted program.
Also attached to this report are addenda to the Engineer's Report regarding the TransDIF and
the SR-125 DIP. These addenda reflect changes discussed in this report.
-.
At the November 9 hearing, Council also requested that staff look into the possibility of
waiving fees for projects that will produce jobs. Staff will be responding to that request as a
separate issue in the near future.
FISCAL IMP ACT: Over the 15-20 years that the current program will be financing facilities,
implementation of the ordinances include collection of 5% of the TransDlf fee for "DIF
Support" and 2% of the SR-125 fee for administration. Of the 5% DIF support (which
amounts to 5% of the $97.7 million program or approximately $4.9 million), approximately
$2 million would be used for administration by City staff, and approximately $2.9 million for
support, studies, monitoring and other associated activities by consultants. Likewise, for the
SR-125 program, 2% of the $16.4 million program or $330,000 would be for administration
by City Staff. Therefore, the City would realize approximately $2.3 million to compensate it
for staff activities and $2.9 million to compensate the City for consultant services.
CST:HX-OOl
WPC F:\home\cnginccr\agcndal&r12S.ord
-.
6-2
ADDENDUM TO
"L~TERLl\1 STATE ROUTE 125 FACILITY FEASmILITY STUDY" REPORT
(Dated May, 1993)
Current Program Cost (Table 4.4.4)
Delete Segments 6 & 7
Subtotal
$27,953,000
($13,343,000)
$14,610,000
Financing Costs
Adjusted Program Cost (1/95)
$2,504,000
$17,114,000
Current Area of Benefit (AOB) (Table 8.2)
Est. Permits issued prior to 1/94
Est permits 1/94-1/95
Remaining Area of Benefit
22,831 EDUs
(460)
(1,500)
20,871 EDUs
Proposed Fee
$17,1 ]4,000
20,871 EDU = $820
Fee applicable effective January 1. 1995
Development Type
Single Family Detached Dwelling
Single Family Attached Dwelling
Multi-Family Dwelling
Commercial
Industrial
Religious Institutional
Transportation Fee
$820Dwelling Unit
$656/Dwelling Unlt
$492/Dwelling Unit
$20,500/Gross Acre
$16,400/Gross Acre
$15,992/Gross Acre
~ "3
-
ADDENDUM TO
"EASTE&~ AREA DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE FOR STREETS" REPORT
(Dated November 9, 1993)
Current Program Cost (Table 3)
Inflation factor (4%)
Subtotal
$98,128,585
$3,925,143
$102,053,728
DIF revenues projected to 1/95
Adjusted Program Cost (1/95)
$3,090,600
$98,963,128
Current Area of Benefit (AOB) (Table 1)
Est Permits issued prior to 1/94
Est permits 1/94-1/95
Permits with EDU credits
Remaining Participants
25,722
(220)
1500 EDU
-750 EDU
750 EDU
(750)
24,752
Proposed Fee
$98.963,128
24,752 EDU
$3,998
-,
Fee applicable effective January 1. 1995
Development Type
Single Family Detached Dwelling
Single Family Attached Dwelling
Multi-Family Dwelling
Commercial
Industrial
Religious Institutional
Golf Course
Medical Center
Olympic Training Center (OTC)
Adjacent to O.T.c.
Transportation Fee
$3,998/Dwelling Unit
$3, 1 98/Dwelling Unit
$2,399/Dwelling Unit
$99,950/Gross Acre
$79,960/Gross Acre
$15,992/Gross Acre
$3, 198/Gross Acre
$259,870/Gross Acre
$13 ,313/Gross Acre
$139,930/Gross Acre
~.."
i> -i
)'\'\o~
O<{/
ORDINANCE NO. 2~72 ~~ ~
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, C~A,
ESTABLISHING AN INTERIM PRE-SR125 DEVELOP~ IMPACT
FEE TO PAY FOR TRANSPORTATION FACIL~~ THE CITY'S
EASTERN TERRITORIES ~<y9'
WHEREAS, the City's General Plan Land Use and Circulation Elements require that adequate,
safe transportation facilities be available to accommodate the increased traffic created by new
development, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that potential delays in the construction of State
Route (SR) 125 by CALTRANS or others will adversely impact the City's ability to accommodate said
increased traffic, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that new development within the Eastern
Territories will create adverse impacts on the City's transportation system which must be mitigated by
the financing and construction of certain transportation facilities identified in this Ordinance, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that a reasonable means of financing the
transportation facilities is to levy a fee on all development in the Eastern Territories of the City, and
WHEREAS, the fee has been justified by the financial and engineering study entitled "Interim
State Route 125 Facility Feasibility Study" dated May 1993, and prepared by Howard Needles Tammen
& Bergendoff ("Study").
WHEREAS, the financial and engineering study and the City's General Plan show that the
transportation network will be adversely impacted by new development within the Eastern Territories
unless new transportation facilities are added to accommodate the new development, and
WHEREAS, the financial and engineering study and the City's General Plan establish that the
transportation facilities necessitated by development in the Eastern Territories comprises an integrated
network, and
WHEREAS, developers of land within the Eastern Territories should be required to mitigate the
burden created by development through the construction of transportation facilities within the boundaries
of the development, the construction of those transportation facilities outside the boundaries of the
development which are needed to provide service to the development in accordance with City standards,
and the payment of a fee to finance the development's portion of the total cost of the transportation
network, and
Page 1
~/J"J
WHEREAS, all development within the Eastern Territories contribute to the cumulative burden
on the transportation network in direct relationship to the amount of traffic originated by or destined
for the development, and
.-
WHEREAS, the amount of traffic generated has been determined based upon average daily trips
for various land areas based upon studies conducted by SANDAG (commercial trips being modified to
eliminate passerby trips) and verified by the financial and engineering study prepared for the purposes
of this fee, and
WHEREAS, the SANDAG traffic generation determinations have been used by numerous public
agencies in San Diego County for various purposes, including the preparation of General Plan
Circulation Elements, the justification of traffic impact fees, and transportation planning, and have been
determined to be a reliable and accepted means of allocating the burden on a transportation network to
development to be serviced by the network, and
WHEREAS, on July 27, 1993, the City Council held a duly noticed meeting at which oral or
written presentations could be made, and
WHEREAS, the City Council determined based upon the evidence presented at the meeting, the
City's General Plan and the various reports and other information received by the City Council in the
course of its business that imposition of the Interim pre-SR-125 impact fee on all development in the
Eastern Territories for which building permits have not yet been issued is necessary in order to protect
the public safety and welfare and in order to ensure effective implementation of the City's General Plan,
and
-
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the amount of the fee levied by this Ordinance
does not exceed the estimated cost of providing the transportation facilities.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1:
Establishment of Fee.
(a) An interim pre-SR-125 development impact fee in the amounts set forth in subsection (d)
is hereby established to pay for transportation improvements and facilities within the
Eastern Territories of the City. The fee shall be paid before the issuance of building
permits for each development project within the Eastern Territories of the City. The fees
shall be expended only for the purposes set forth in this ordinance. The Director of
Finance is authorized to establish various accounts within the fund for the various
improvements and facilities identified in this ordinance and to periodically make
expenditures from the fund for the purposes set forth herein in accordance with the
facilities phasing plan or capital improvement plan adopted by the City Council. The
City Council finds that collection of the fees established by this ordinance at the time of
the building permit is necessary to ensure that funds will be available for the construction
........."
Page 2
t/J --.;2
of facilities concurrent with the need for those facilities and to ensure certainty in the
capital facilities budgeting for the Eastern Territories.
(b) Said fee shall be in effect commencing January 1, 1995.
(c) The fee established by this section is in addition to the requirements imposed by other
City laws, policies or regulations relating to the construction or the financing of the
construction of public improvements within subdivisions or developments.
(d) The fee for each development shall be calculated at the time of building permit
application based upon the following schedule:
Development Type
Single Family
Detached Dwelling
Single Family
Attached Dwelling
Multi-Family
Dwelling
Commercial
Industrial
Tran~rtation Fee
$820/Dwelling Unit
$656/Dwelling Unit
$492/Dwelling Unit
$20,500/Gross Acre
$16,400/Gross Acre
The City Council shall annually review the amount of the fee. The City Council
may adjust the amount of the fee as necessary to reflect changes in the
Engineering-News Record Construction Index, the type, size, location or cost of
the Transportation Facilities to be financed by the fee, changes in land use
designations in the City's General Plan, and upon other sound engineering,
financing and planning information. Adjustments to the above fee may be made
by resolution amending the Master Fee Schedule.
(e) The fees collected shall be used by the City for the following purposes as
determined by the City Council:
1. To pay for the construction of facilities by the City, or to reimburse the
City for facilities installed by the City with funds from other sources as
such facility may be modified, deleted, amended or added from time to
time by the Council in order to implement the pre-SR-125 strategy as
defined in the Study.
Page 3
~/9':J
2.
To reimburse developers who have been required by Section 4(a) of this
ordinance to install improvements that are street facilities and are listed in
Section 3.
-,
3. To reimburse developers who have been permitted to install improvements
pursuant to Section 4(b) of this ordinance.
4. To administer and update the fee program including retaining consultants
to perform engineering of financing studies.
SECTION 2: Definitions.
For the purposes of this ordinance, the following words or phrases shall be construed as
defined in this Section, unless from the context it appears that a different meaning is
intended.
(a) "Building Permit" means a permit required by and issued pursuant to the Uniform
Building Code as adopted by reference by this City.
(b) "Developer" means the owner or developer of a development.
(c)
"Development Permit" means any discretionary permit, entitlement or approval
for a development project issued under any zoning or subdivision ordinance of the
City.
-
(d) "Development Project" or "Development" means any activity described in Section
65927 and 65928 of the State Government Code.
(e) "Eastern Territories" means that area of the City located between Interstate 805
on the west, the City sphere of influence boundary on the east, Bonita Road on
the north, and the alignment of the proposed extension of East Orange Avenue
on the south, as shown on the Chula Vista General Plan. The property known
as Bonita Gateway located at the northeast quadrant of Bonita Road and I-80S
intersection is also included. For the purposes of this fee, Eastern Territories
shall be further restricted to exclude the following projects:
Eastlake Trails
Eastlake Vistas
Eastlake Woods
Eastlake Business Park II
Bonita Meadows
Phases of Salt Creek Ranch exceeding 1043 Equivalent Dwelling Units
Phases of San Miguel Ranch exceeding 1350 Equivalent Dwelling Units
-
Page 4
~A'i
(f) "Financial and engineering study": means the "Interim State Route 125 Facility
Feasibility Study" dated May, 1993, and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.
SECTION 3:
TransJ>Ortation Facilities to be Financed by the Fee.
(a) The transportation facilities to be financed by the fee established by this ordinance
are:
Segment 1 Sweetwater Road (Bonita Road to SR-l25)
Segment 2 Bonita Road (Sweetwater Road To San Miguel Road)
Segment 3 San Miguel Road (Bonita Road to Proctor Valley Road)
Segment 4 Proctor Valley Road (San Miguel Road to SR-l25 corridor)
Segment 5 SR-l25 Corridor (The SR-l25 corridor is the right-of-way reserved through Eastlake and Sah Creek I)
(b) The City Council may modify or amend the list of projects in order to maintain
compliance with the Circulation Element of the City's General Plan. The City
Council may also modify the list of projects funded by this program to adjust to
changes in projected growth patterns, or changes in traffic circulation needs
providing that the City Council finds, at a public hearing, that the collected fees
will be used to benefit overall transportation in the City of Chula Vista.
SECTION 4:
Developer Construction of Transportation Facilities.
(a) Whenever a developer of a development project would be required by application
of City law or policy, as a condition of approval of a development permit to
construct or finance the construction of a portion of a transportation facility
identified in Section 3 of this ordinance, the City Council may impose an
additional requirement that the development install the improvements with
supplemental size, length or capacity in order to ensure efficient and timely
construction of the transportation facilities network. If such a requirement is
imposed, the City Council shall, in its discretion, enter into a reimbursement
agreement with the developer, or give a credit against the fee otherwise levied by
this ordinance on the development project.
(b) A developer may request authorization from the City Council to construct one or
more of the facilities listed in Section 3. The request shall be made in writing to
the City Council and shall contain the following informational conditions:
1. Detailed description of the project with a preliminary cost estimate.
2. Requirements of developer:
Page 5
t/1"~
preparation of plans and specifications for approval by the City; -,
secure and dedicate any right-of-way required for the project;
secure all required permits, environmental clearances necessary for
construction of the project;
provision of performance bonds;
payment of all City fees and costs.
3. The City will not be responsible for any of the costs of constructing the
project. The developer shall advance all necessary funds to construct the
project.
SECTION 5: This ordinance s.hall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day
from and after its adoption.
Presented by
/
App:oved as t~ form b
.l~~ )\ /
J:?
John Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
;.
I
Bruce M. Boogaard,
ttorney
-
WPC F: \bome\c:ogiDcer\878. 93
-
Page 6
t/l'~
\o~
<;)0<<'\
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VIST ~\) ~
CALIFORNIA AMENDING ORDINANCE N~. ~,
RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE TO P OR
TRANSPORTATION FACILmES IN THE CITY'S STERN
TERRITORIES O~\)
C:JYvO
ORDINANCE NO. 2580
WHEREAS, in January 1988, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista adopted
Ordinance No. 2251 establishing a development impact fee for transportation facilities in the
City's eastern territories, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2251, the City has commenced the collection of
development impact fees to be used to construct transportation facilities to accommodate
increased traffic generated by new development within the City's Eastern Territories, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 1 (c) of Ordinance No. 2251 and California Government
Code Sections 66000, et. seq., the City Council has caused a study to be conducted to reanalyze
and reevaluate the impacts of development on the transportation system for the City's eastern
territories and, to further reanalyze and reevaluate the development impact fee necessary to pay
for the transportation facilities which financial and engineering study prepared by City staff, is
entitled "Eastern Area Development Impact Fees for Streets 1993 Revision" dated July 13, 1993,
and
WHEREAS, the financial and engineering study and the City's General Plan show that
the transportation network will be adversely impacted by new development within the eastern
territories unless new transportation facilities are added to accommodate the new development,
and
WHEREAS, the financial and engineering studies and the City's General Plan establish
that the transportation facilities necessitated by development in the eastern territories comprise
an integrated network, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that developers of land within the Eastern
Territory should be required to mitigate the burden created by development through the
construction of transportation facilities within the boundaries of the development, the
construction of those transportation facilities outside the boundaries of the development which
are needed to provide service to the development in accordance with City standards and the
payment of a development impact fee to finance the development's portion of the costs of the
transportation network, and
WHEREAS, the City Council hereby determines that the legislative findings and
determinations set forth in Ordinance No. 2251 continue to be true and correct, and
(;,/3" I
Page 1
WHEREAS, on July 27, 1993, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista held a duly
noticed meeting at which oral or written presentations regarding the development impact fee for
the City's eastern territories could be made, and _
WHEREAS, after consideration of the evidence presented to it including the "Eastern
Areas Development Impact Fees for Streets" study the City Council determined that certain
amendments to Ordinance No. 2251 are necessary in order to assure that there are sufficient
funds available to finance the transportation facilities necessary to serve the eastern territories
by the development impact fee, and
WHEREAS, the City Council determines, based on the evidence presented at the
meeting, the City's General Plan, and the various reports and information received by the City
Council in the ordinary course of its business, that the imposition of traffic impact fees on all
development in the eastern territories for which building permits have not been issued is
necessary in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare and in order to assure effective
implementation of the City's General Plan, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the amount ofthe amended fees levied
by this Ordinance does not exceed the estimated cost of providing the transportation facilities,
and
WHEREAS, the City Council determines that it is appropriate to resolve the fees for
commercial land uses to reflect the fact that many of the trips associated with the commercial
land uses are in fact, trips associated with other land uses that incorporate an intermediate stop
at a commercial land use (passerby trips), and _
WHEREAS, it is necessary to ensure the timely payment of the "DIF program support"
cost item, included in Table 2 "Capital Improvement projects - cost estimate summary" of the
financial and engineering study to adequately fund ongoing and future administration activities
and studies, and
WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that reduction of trips from commercial land
uses may place an inordinate burden on commercial land uses where public facility assessments
have been placed on the affected properties in anticipation of payment of transportation fees, and
as a result of said adjustment, the proposed fees are now lower than the value of the
assessments.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain as
follows:
SECTION 1:
That the development impact fee schedule set forth in Section l(c) of Ordinance No.
2251 is amended to read as follows:
'........
~[]-c2
Page 2
Table 1
Fee applicable prior to January 1, 1995
TABLE 1
Development Type Transportation Fee
Single Family Detached Dwelling $3.060/Dwelling Unit
Single Family Attached Dwelling $2.448/Dwelling Unit
Multi-Family Dwelling $1,836/Dwelling Unit
Commercial $122,400/Gross Acre
Industrial $61,200/Gross Acre
Religious Institutional $12,240/Gross Acre
Golf Course $3,OS2/Gross Acre
Medical Center $198,900/Gross Acre
Olympic Training Center (OTC) $10.189/Gross Acre
Adjacent to O.T.C. $107.100/Gross Acre
Table 2
Fee applicable effective January 1, 1995
TABLE 2
Development Type Transportation Fee
Single Family Detached Dwelling $3,998/Dwelling Unit
Single Family Attached Dwelling $3, 198/Dwelling Unit
Multi-Family Dwelling $2.399/Dwelling Unit
Commercial $99,9S0/Gross Acre
Industrial $79,960/Gross Acre
Religious Institutional $IS.992/Gross Acre
Golf Course $3, 198/Gross Acre
Medical Center $2S9,870/Gross Acre
Olympic Training Center (OTC) $13,313/Gross Acre
Adjacent to O.T.C. $139.930/Gross Acre
~[J-J
Page 3
The City Council shall at least annually review the amount of the fee. The City Council
may adjust the amount of the fee as necessary to reflect changes in the Engineering-News
Record Construction Index, the type, size, location or cost of the Transportation
Facilities to be financed by the fee, changes in land use designations in the City's
General Plan, and upon other sound engineering, financing and planning information.
Adjustments to the above fees may be made by resolution amending the Master Fee
Schedule.
-
SECTION 2:
That the definition "Eastern Territories" as set forth in Section 2e of Ordinance 2251 is
amended to read as follows:
"Eastern Territories" means that area of the City located between
Interstate 805 on the west, the City sphere-of-influence boundary on the
east, Bonita Road on the north and the alignment of the proposed
extension of East Orange Avenue on the south, as shown on the map
entitled "Developable Land Area (Map 1)" of the financial and
engineering study. The property known as Bonita Gateway located at the
northeast quadrant of Bonita Road and 1-805 intersection is also included.
SECTION 3:
That the definition of "Financial and Engineering studies" as set forth in Section 2f of
Ordinance No. 2251 is amended to read as follows:
~
"Financial and engineering studies": means the "Interim Eastern
Area Development Impact Fees for Streets" study prepared by
George T. Simpson and Willdan Associates dated November 1987,
the "Eastern Area Development Fees for Streets" study prepared
by Willdan Associates dated November 19, 1990, and the "Eastern
Development Impact Fees for Streets - 1993 Revision" study
prepared by City staff dated July 13, 1993, which are on file in the
Office of the City Clerk".
SECTION 4:
That the list of facilities and programs set forth in Section 3(a) of the Ordinance No.
2251 is amended to read as follows:
The transportation facilities and programs to be financed by the fee
established by this Ordinance are:
1. * State Route 125 from San Miguel Road to Telegraph Canyon
Road.
-
2. * State Route 125 from Telegraph Canyon Road to Orange Avenue.
~3 - if
Page 4
3. Telegraph Canyon Road from Paseo Del Rey to east of Paseo
Ladera/north side.
3a. Telegraph Canyon Road at I-80S interchange/Phase II.
4. ** Telegraph Canyon Road - Phase I Rutgers Avenue to EastLake
Boundary .
5. ** Telegraph Canyon Road - Phase II Paseo Ladera to Apache Drive.
6. Telegraph Canon Road - Phase III Apache Drive to Rutgers
Avenue.
7. East H Street - I-80S interchange modifications.
8. ** East H Street from EastLake Drive to SR-125.
9. ** Otay Lakes Road from Camino del Cerro Grande to Ridgeback
Road.
10. Otay Lakes Road from Telegraph Canyon Road to East Orange
Avenue.
11. Bonita Road from Otay Lakes Road to Central A venue.
12. Bonita Road from Central Avenue to San Miguel Road.
13. San Miguel Road from Bonita Road to SR-125
14. ** East H Street from State Route 125 to San Miguel Road.
15. Proctor Valley Road (East H Street) from San Miguel Road to
Hunte Parkway.
16. Orange Avenue from Oleander Avenue to Sunbow Eastern
Boundary .
17. Palomar Street from Oleander Avenue to Sunbow Eastern
Boundary .
18. ** Telegraph Canyon Road from eastern boundary of EastLake to
Hunte Parkway.
19. ** EastLake Parkway from Telegraph Canyon Road to EastLake High
School southern boundary.
20. Hunte Parkway from Proctor Valley Road to Telegraph Canyon
Road. .
~E"p
Page 5
21. ** Hunte Parkway from Telegraph Canyon Road to Club House
Drive.
--
21a. Hunte Parkway from Club House Drive to East Orange Avenue.
22. East Orange Avenue from EastLake Parkway to Hunte Parkway.
23. Paseo Ranchero Road to Telegraph Canyon Road to East Orange
Avenue.
24. East Orange Avenue from eastern Sunbow Boundary to EastLake
Parkway.
25. East Orange Avenue - 1-805 Interchange Modifications.
26. East Palomar Street from eastern Sunbow Boundary to Paseo
Ranchero.
27. East Palomar Street at 1-805 Interchange.
28. Telegraph Canyon Road from Hunte Parkway to Wueste Road.
29.
East Orange Avenue from Hunte Parkway to Olympic Training
Center.
,.-.."
30. Telegraph Canyon Road from SR-125 to EastLake Parkway.
31. EastLake Parkway from Fenton Street to Telegraph Canyon Road.
32. East H Street from 1-805 to Hidden Vista Drive
33. Bonita Road at Otay Lakes Road Intersection.
34. Otay Lakes Road at Elmhurst Drive Intersection.
35. East H Street at Otay Lakes Road Intersection.
36. Traffic Signal Interconnection - Eastern Territories.
37. EastLake Parkway from EastLake High School Southern Boundary
to East Orange Avenue.
38. East H Street from Paseo Del Rey to Tierra del Rey.
39. Bonita Road from 1-805 to Plaza Bonita Road.
-
*Project is now included in the interim pre-S~.125 transportation facility fee. .
**Project has been completed.
~j{-~
Page 6
SECTION 5: PAYMENT OF "DIF PROGRAM SUPPORT"
The "DIF Program Support" shall with no exceptions be paid in cash concurrently with
the development impact fee at a rate equal to 5 % of the total applicable fee.
SECTION 6: This section shall become effective on January 1, 1995. Commercial land
uses with street improvement assessments placed on the property shall be eligible for a credit
against payment of applicable interim pre SR-125 fees as required by Ordinance 2579 or
subsequent amendments to said ordinance. Credits realized under this section shall not exceed
the lessor of:
1. The interim Pre-SR125 fee for the subject property, or
2. The amount that said assessment exceeds the Transportation Development Impact
fee in effect at the time payment of said fees is required.
SECTION 7. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force 30 days after its ado
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
Presented by
John P. Lippitt
Director of Public Works
c: \or\884. 93
&8-7/6/j-q
Page 7
-,
TInS PAGE BlANK
-,
-
c::, 8 - gr
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
SUBMITTED BY:
Item 2
Meeting Date ~ y'~.9'1
ORDINANCE .J.~8" J Amending Ordinance 2577 r~~ the 5.8-
acre parcel located at the southwest corner of Third~~~-and J Street
from C-O, Office Commercial and R-1, Single J\iMily Residential to
C-C-P, Central Commercial, Precise Plan. ~~\j.
~
Director of Planning ecJv O~<:) ~
/: rU 'O<vQ
City Manage~ ~ ~J (4/5ths Vote: Yes_NoX)
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
The City Council set a public hearing for December 7, 1993, to reconsider the General Plan and
Rezoning application of American Stores, Inc. for 5.8 acres located at the corner of Third and
"J" Street. After conducting the necessary hearing, Council voted to let their previous action
approving the General Plan and rezoning stand as approved by their vote on November 2, 1993,
and moved to amend the Precise Plan standards in accordance with the attached ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the attached Ordinance of the City of Chula Vista
amending Ordinance 2577 which established the rezoning of the 5. 8-acre parcel located at the
southwest corner of Third Avenue and J Street from C-O, Office Commercial and R-1, Single
Family Residential to C-C-P, Central Commercial, Precise Plan.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
(Iuclcyord.Al13)
7-/
-,
TInS PAGE BLANK
-
-
7-;2
;\~~
0<<'/
~
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMEN~G
ORDINANCE NO. 2577, REZONING THE 5.8 ACRE~CEL
LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THIR~D ~~ENUE
AND J STREET FROM C-O, OFFICE COMMERCI AND R-1,
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO C-C-P, ~ RAL
COMMERCIAL, PRECISE PLAN, TO AMEND ~:RTAIN PRECISE
PLAN STANDARDS THEREOF. e;,<()'
ORDINANCE NO.
02.f~3
WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a rezone was filed
with the Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista on
December 2, 1993 by American Properties Inc., and
WHEREAS, the property consists of approximately 5.8 acres
located at the southwest corner of Third Avenue and "J" Street
and diagrammatically presented on the area map attached hereto as
Exhibit A ("Site" or "Property"); and
WHEREAS, said application requested to change the existing
C-O, Office Commercial and R-1, single Family Residential zone to
C-C, Central Commercial; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for
a hearing on said rezoning application and notice of said
hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication
in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing
to property owners within 1,000 feet of the exterior boundaries
of the property at least 21 days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as
advertised, namely 7:00 p.m. October 13,1993 in the Council
Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and
said hearing was thereafter closed; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission found that the project
would have no significant environmental impacts and adopted the
Negative Declaration issued on IS-92-42, and voted 6-0-1
(Tuchscher-conflict of interest) to recommend that the City
Council approve the rezoning from C-O, Office Commercial and R-1,
single Family Residential to C-C-P, Central commercial, Precise
Plan, subject to the Precise Plan Standards listed in the Draft
city Council Ordinance.
WHEREAS, the city Council approved and adopted Ordinance No.
2577 on November 9, 1993 rezoning the Property in the manner
recommended by the Planning commission, and imposing certain
Precise Plan Standards therefore, numbered 1 through 25; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council moved to reconsider the adoption
e:\lucky.wp
December 5, 1993
Ord. Amending Lucky's Precise Plan Standards
Page 1
7~ I / 7 ~ 3
of said Ordinance No. 2577 on November 23, 1993 in light of
complaints received by neighbors on Garrett Avenue; and,
-
WHEREAS, the City Council reconsidered their adoption on
December 7, 1993, and thereupon amended certain precise plan
standards in the manner herein identified, and continued the
matter to December 14, 1993.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista
does hereby find, determine, and ordain as follows:
SECTION I: Based on the findings and recommendations of the
Environmental Review Coordinator, the City Council does hereby
readopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration issued on IS-92-42.
In readopting said Mitigated Negative Declaration, the City
Council considered the comments of Bill Darnell as contained in a
letter dated December 7, 1993, and all evidence presented at said
public hearing of December 7, 1993, and respond thereto in the
manner set forth in the attached Exhibit A, incorporated herein
by reference. No such evidence has changed the conclusions of
either the Environmental Review Coordinator or the City Council
that the project as mitigated has no significant environmental
effects.
SECTION II. Ordinance No. 2577 is hereby amended by
amending the Precise Plan Standards therein contained as follows:
-
A. Precise Plan Standard No. 3 shall be amended as follows:
"3. No delivery truck traffic shall occur in the alley
during the time from ~2:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m., and all
access to said alley shall be in one direction with
access off of J Street proceedina southerly."
B. Precise Plan Standard No. 12 shall be amended to read as
follows:
"12. Loading docks shall be oriented away from the westerly
adjacent residential area and buffered with parts of
the building and/or wing walls equal in height to truck
height. The "winawall" on the south side in the
southwest corner currently planned to be adiacent to
the loadina dock shall be extended easterly to coincide
with the full lenath of the loadina area and at a
heiaht to screen all loadina activities from view and
to reduce noise to acceptable levels, the exact heiaht
to be determined bv the Desian Review Committee."
C. Precise Plan Standard No. 18 shall be amended as
follows:
-
e:\lucky.wp
December 5, 1993
Ord. Amending Lucky's ,Precise Plan Standards
Page 2
7,-Lj
"18. Duty to Construct Wall. A zoning wall of sufficient
density to reduce noise of a material, auality and
desian as may be required by Desian Review shall be
built on or parallel to the west property line, at a
location determined in a manner specified by Condition
1a.A., shall be between 6 and 10 feet in heiaht as may
be specificallY determined by the majority of the
owners of those properties located on the east side of
Garrett Avenue immediately abuttina the westerlY
properlY line of the site ("Seven Property Owners")'.
The wall shall be architecturally treated on both
sides.
A. Location of Wall. The zonina wall reauired by
Condition No. 1a shall be built in a position as
determined bY the Seven Property Owners but no further
westerly than the westerly property line of site and no
further easterly than 20 feet east of the westerlY
property line of the site.
1. Grant of Easement. On the condition that the
Seven Property Owners waive any claim, action or
suit against Applicant for the issuance of this
rezonina, and if the wall is located east of the
westerly property line, Applicant shall arant, for
the period of time that the site is used bY
American stores for commercial purposes, easements
to each of the Seven Property Owners over the area
formed by extendina each of their respective
property lines to said wall ("Extensions"), for
the purpose of enterina upon, landscape, and
maintain landscaping, irriaation, and conduct
recreational uses upon, upon said area. American
stores shall prohibit construction of above around
structures in said area except fences along such
Extensions.
2. Duty to Landscape InitiallY. On the condition
that, pursuant to the provisions of paraaraph
1a.A.1. above, if Applicant arants the Seven
Property Owners easements, Applicant shall be
obliaated to initially landscape the area of each
easement so aranted, on a one-time basis only, to
the reasonable satisfaction of each of the
respective property owners, not substantiallY
greater than existina landscapina. Disputes as to
the amount of landscapina reauired shall be
1. define
e:\lucky.wp
December 5, 1993
Ord. Amending Lucky's Precise Plan Standards
Page 3
7-5
resolved by the Planninq Director. or his
desiqnee. The Applicant shall be relieved of any
further obliqation to landscape or maintain
landscapinq. and such shall be the sole
responsibility of the respective property owners."
--
D. Precise Plan Standard No. 26 shall be added which shall
read as follows:
"26. In the event that the Zoninq Administrator shall.
subsequent to the adoption of this ordinance. determine that
vehicles usinq the alleyway to the west of the proposed
improvement at inappropriate or excessive speeds
constitutinq a nuisance to the Seven Property Owners, the
Zoninq Administrator may require that Applicant install
speed bumps in a number and of a desiqn sufficient as he
shall determine appropriate, and such requirement shall
constitute a Precise Plan Standard in the same manner and
effect as if such requirement was listed in this resolution
without condition."
E. Precise Plan Standard No. 27 shall be added which shall
read as follows:
"27. Applicant shall, subiect to appeal to the City
Council, implement any and all desiqn features specifically .-
intended to mitiqate noise and traffic problems as
determined by the Desiqn Review Committee as appropriate."
SECTION III: Findings.
The City Council finds that the modifications to the Precise
Plan Standards are consistent with the City of Chula Vista
General Plan and that the public necessity, convenience, general
welfare, and good zoning practice support the rezoning to C-C-P,
Central Commercial, Precise Plan zone.
SECTION IV: This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full
force the thirtieth day from its adoption.
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
V.
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
by
Presented by
-,
e:\lucky.wp
December 5, 1993
Ord. Amending Lucky's Precise Plan Standards
Page 4
7-~
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
SUBMITTED BY:
Item g
Meeting Date 01/04/94 ~
\\0
ORDINANCE 2585 AMENDING ORDINANCE 214~~TH
RESPECT TO LIMITATIONS ON THE AMOUN~~'bF TAX
INCREMENT REVENUES FROM THE BA YFROID'ttbWN CENTRE
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS,.. ~ AUTHORIZING
INSTITUTION OF mDICIAL PROCEE~~ TO DETERMINE THE
VALIDITY HEREOF - SECOND RE~G AND ADOPTION
Community Development Director ~..~
City Manager~
(4/5ths Vote: Yes
No X)
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND: On December 28, 1993 the City Council passed Urgency Ordinance 2585
(amending Ordinance 2146). In order to assure adoption in the event the "Urgency" passage is
challenged, the Council is requested to hold a second reading and adoption.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Council hold a second reading and adopt Ordinance 2585.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
In 1986 the City Council passed Ordinance 2146 as required by AB 690 establishing debt and
term imitations for the Bayfront/Town Centre Project Areas. The Ordinance established a
limitation on total tax increment revenues in an aggregate amount of $50 million for the Bayfront
Project Area and $20 million for the Town Centre I Project Area. However, these figures were
intended to represent the principal amount of bonds which could be issued for each Project Area
and not the total aggregate amount of tax increment revenues which could be received by the
Agency. (Total debt service is generally two to three times the face amount of bonds). The
amounts set forth in Ordinance 2146 are, in fact, not adequate to retire current debt obligations
for the Bayfront Project Area. Ordinance 2585 replaces these figures with the correct limits for
total tax increment revenues as originally intended.
FISCAL IMPACT: Section 1 of Ordinance 2146 is amended to limit the amount of tax
revenues which may be divided and allocated to the Agency to the amount which would be
required for any fiscal year to pay the principal, interest and related charges on loan advances
or indebtedness issued by the Redevelopment Agency in the aggregate principal amounts as
follows:
In the Bayfront Project Area:
$50 million (total amount of principal and interest
not to exceed $210 million).
Town Centre I Project Area:
$20 million (total amount of principal and interest
not to exceed $84 million).
[C :\WP51 \AGENCY\RA4S\BAYFRON7 .RA4]
?5~/
0~
ORDINANCE NO. 2585 0'<\~
'('oV
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF C~~ VISTA
AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2146 WITH RESPEC~T...TO.~RITATIONS
ON THE AMOUNT OF TAX INCREMENT REVEN FROM THE
BAY FRONT /TOWN CENTRE REDEVELOPMENT PR . T AREAS, AND
AUTHORIZING INSTITUTION OF JUDIC~~ PROCEEDINGS TO
DETERMINE THE VALIDITY HEREOF ~vv
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chula vista (the
"City") has heretofore enacted Ordinance No. 1541 on July 16, 1974,
approving the Redevelopment Plan for the Bayfront Redevelopment
Project and Ordinance No. 1691 on July 28, 1976 approving the
Redevelopment Plan for the Town Centre Redevelopment Project,
respectively (jointly the "Redevelopment Plans" and individually
the "Bayfront Plan" and "Town Centre Plan"), pursuant the
California Community Redevelopment Law (the "Law") consisting of
Part 1 of Division 24 of the Health and Safety Code of the State of
California, and the Project Areas described in each of the
Redevelopment Plans (the "Project Areas") have been merged pursuant
to Ordinance No. 1872 enacted by the City Council on July 17, 1979;
and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 33333.4 of the Law, the City
Council has previously adopted its Ordinance No. 2146 on April 22,
1986 which (among other things) contains a limitation on the
aggregate amount of tax increment revenues which may be divided and
allocated to the Agency pursuant to the Redevelopment Plans; and,
WHEREAS, said Ordinance No. 2146 did not properly express the
intention of the City Council as it existed at that time in
establishing said limitation, and the City Council wishes at this
time to amend said Ordinance No. 2146 to give effect to such
original intention;
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Findings and Determinations. The city Council
hereby finds and determines that the limitation contained in
Section 1 of Ordinance No. 2146 did not properly express the
original intention of the City Council in establishing said
limitation, and that the amendment of said Ordinance No. 2146
pursuant to this Ordinance is appropriate to clarify the original
intention of the City Council. In making such finding and
determination, the City Council has considered, among other things,
the fact that concurrent with the adoption of Ordinance No. 2146
the City Council approved the issuance and sale by the
Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista of its tax
allocation bonds in the aggregate principal amount of $38,655,000,
the aggregate amount of principal of and interest on which exceed
the limitations set forth in Ordinance No. 2146.
Section 2. Amendment of Ordinance No. 2146. Section 1 of
Ordinance No. 2146 is hereby amended in its entirety to read as
<g-I / Z--.3
ORDINANCE 2585
follows:
"The aggregate amount of Tax Revenues which may be
divided and allocated to the Agency pursuant to the
Redevelopment Plan for the Bayfront Redevelopment Project
shall be limited to the amount which would be required in any
fiscal year to pay the principal, interest, issue and
underwriting charges coming due in such fiscal year on loans,
advances or indebtedness issued by the Agency in the
aggregate principal amount of Fifty Million Dollars
($50,000,000), the total ~ual amount of which principal and
interest is $'p"'f 0 ~ . The aggregate amount of Tax
Revenues which maf be divided and allocated to the Agency
pursuant to the Redevelopment Plan for the 'Town Centre
Redevelopment Project shall be limited to the amount which
would be required in any fiscal year to pay the principal and
interest coming due in such fiscal year on loans, advances or
indebtedness issued by the Agency in the aggregate principal
amount of Twenty Million Dollars ($20,000,000), the total
actual amount of which rinci al and interest is
~~. For purposes of calculation, it shall be
assumed hat the loans, advances or indebtedness of the
Agency bear interest at the maximum rate permitted by law,
that principal and interest come due and payable in
approximately equal annual installments, and that the loans,
advances or indebtedness mature over a period of thirty (30)
years from the date of their issuance (such issuance to occur
within the time limit set forth in Section 2)Y. The Agency
shall be entitled to receive Tax Revenues in any fiscal year
in the full amount calculated under this Section 1 even
though such amount may exceed the amount actually required to
pay principal of and interest on outstanding loans, advances
or indebtedness of the Agency in such fiscal year. Taxes
shall not be divided and shall not be allocated to the Agency
in excess of the limitations established in this Section I."
Section 3. Institution of Judicial Validation Proceedings.
The validity of this Ordinance is hereby authorized to be
determined under and pursuant to the provisions of Sections 860 et
~ of the Code of civil Procedure of the State of California. In
order to determine the validity of this Ordinance and the
amendments made hereby, the City Council hereby authorizes the law
firm of Jones, Hall, Hill & White, a Professional Law Corporation,
in concert with the city Attorney, and such other attorney as City
Attorney shall employ (authority for which is hereby granted and
the expenditures for which are hereby appropriated from the
proceeds of the sale of said bonds) to prepare and cause to be
filed and prosecuted to completion all proceedings required for the
1. For the benefit of Council, this Section 2 refers to Section
2 of Ordinance No. 2146 which established, as the time limit on
the establishing of debt on the Bayfront Plan as July 15, 1999,
and on the Town Centre Project as July 28, 2001.
ff-Y
ORDINANCE 2585
judicial validation of the bonds in the Superior Court of San Diego
County, under and pursuant to said provisions.
section 4. Urgency. This ordinance affects public safety,
health, and welfare of the City of Chula vista and its inhabitants
and therefore shall take full force and effect as provided in
section 5 below. The facts establishing this urgency are that the
discrepency between the Council's intent in adopting Ordinance No.
2146 and the actual articulation of Ordinance No. 2146 could pose
a limitation on the ability of the City Council to adopt a
resolution of intent to issue bonds for the purpose of refunding
preexisting indebtedness (1986 Bayfront Tax Allocation Bonds).
Furthermore, the clarification may be needed immediately (a) in
order to take advantage of the current lower interest rates and
lower debt service costs that are expected to be available on the
refunding issue; (b) in order to take advantage of the "grandfather
clause" set forth in section 33333.6 of the Health and Safety Code
which exempts bonded indebtedness approved prior to January 1, 1994
from otherwise limitations on the ability of the Agency to receive
tax increment; and (c) the monetary savings that are expected to
result are, due to the reduced tax increment proceeds generated to
the Agency from the Project Areas, are needed to avert a possible
declaration of default on the 1986 Bayfront Tax Allocation Bond.
section 5. Nunc Pro Tunc Effective Date. Based on the
finding that this Ordinance is a mere expression of the Council's
original intent in enacting Ordinance No. 2146, this Ordinance
shall, either
(1) upon the final reading and adoption hereof as an urgency
ordinance, or
(2) on the 31st day after the final reading and adoption
hereof if four votes are not cast herefor, or if a court
should determine that there is insufficient basis for
adoption of this ordinance on an urgency basis,
relate back to the date of the adoption of Ordinance No. 2146 as an
expression of the Council's original intent in adopting said
Ordinance, and shall take effect, nunc pro tunc, from and after the
effective date of the passage and adoption of Ordinance No. 2146,
adopted April 22, 1986 ("Nunc Pro Tunc Effective Date"). In the
event that a Court of competent jurisdiction should determine that
the Nunc Pro Tun Effective Date is invalid, this Ordinance shall
take effect as of the appropriate date set forth in subparagraph
(1) or (2) hereof.
Presented by
~~~
Chris Salomone
Community Development Director
ruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
o?'~ C~
LyMan christopher
'6-5/8-7
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item Number
9
Meeting Date 01/04/94
ITEM TITLE: Resolution I 7 ..3 'I ~ Approving an Extension of the Agreement
Between the City of Chula Vista and Remy & Thomas and Authorizing
the Mayor to Execute Said Agreement
SUBMITTED BY: Deputy City Manager Krempl& lV
REVIEWED BY: City Manager Goss1fe~V (4/5ths Vote: Yes_NoXJ
The City of Chula Vista is the agency designated to approve consulting contracts for the Otay
Ranch. The work being requested of Remy & Thomas is to complete final review of the Otay
Ranch Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and supporting documents. Remy & Thomas has,
since November 19,1991, provided legal assistance to the City ofChula Vista and the County
of San Diego in this area. The Agreement has been reviewed by all parties and is acceptable
to Remy & Thomas, the Baldwin Company and City staff. This is the fifth extension of that
original contract executed in 1991. The fourth renewal of the contract had been approved in
November 1993.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution approving the Agreement with Remy &
Thomas to review and provide legal input on the Otay Ranch EIR and supporting documents
and authorizing the Mayor to sign the attached Agreement.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION: Remy & Thomas has provided legal support on this project since November
1991. They have been instrumental in the past in assisting in the content and focus of the EIR
and in review of the EIR including the CEQA Findings, Statement of Overriding
Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring Program. Because of the unique nature of the Otay
Ranch project, an objective third party legal counsel has been invaluable in this process.
Further, we would note that they offer special CEQA expertise which is not available in-house.
This request is being made so that Remy & Thomas can complete the final document
preparation and continue to represent the City and County. This is especially important relative
to the EIR since revised findings, based upon final action by the Board and Council, were
necessary and Remy & Thomas prepared those findings. The basic problem with the November
Agreement we recently presented to Council was not the terms of the Agreement but a cost cap
of $50,000.00. That cap needs to be expanded by $18,000.00 to account for the extra work that
was needed to get final approval by the Council and Board of Supervisors and in November-
December put everything in final form reflective of all of the actions taken.
c;-/
Page 2, Item No.
~
Meeting Date 01104/94
By way of further history, in November of 1991, the Otay Ranch General Manager and
Baldwin requested that legal counsel be retained to assist on the project to provide timely
review and guidance on the EIR and to serve as an initial third party reviewer of all of the
environmental documents. Remy & Thomas (Tina Thomas) was recommended by the City
Attorney based on past City experience. That recommendation was approved by the County
of San Diego and the Baldwin Company.
During 1990, Remy & Thomas was paid by the City of Chula Vista $7,380.85. During 1991,
that amount was $39,462.17. During 1992, that figure was $42,146.34. In 1993 (through
November) that figure was $71,169.65. This request is for an additional $18,000.00 in services
through December 1993.
FISCAL IMP ACT: There will be no fiscal impact to the City of Chula Vista because the
Baldwin Company will be funding this scope-of-work ($18,000.00) through their monthly
deposit to the Otay Ranch trust account.
Attachments
memos#5:\R&TAl13b.ajl
9-c2
RESOLUTION NO.
/7:Ji?
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN EXTENSION OF THE
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND
REMY & THOMAS FOR LEGAL CONSULTING SERVICES
FOR THE OTAY RANCH PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista is the agency designated
to approve consulting contracts for the Otay Ranch; and
WHEREAS, Remy & Thomas is requested to continue
environmental legal review of the otay Ranch Environmental Impact
Report and supporting documents; and
WHEREAS, the agreement has been reviewed by all parties
and is acceptable to Remy & Thomas, the Baldwin Company and the
city and the County is supportive of the scope of services to be
undertaken; and
WHEREAS, this fifth extension is anticipated to be the
final extension of that original contract executed in 1991.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby approve an extension of the
agreement between the City of Chula vista and Remy & Thomas for
legal consulting services for the Otay Ranch Project, a copy of
which is on file in the office of the City Clerk.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of
Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said
agreement for and on ,behalf of the City of Chula Vista.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
George Krempl, Deputy city
Manager
Booga
C:\RS\Remy&Thomas
9-J
CONTRACT HISTORY
Original Contract, dated November 19, 1991, for $20,000.00 ending June 30, 1992.
First Renewal of Contract, dated October 29, 1992, for $20,000.00 ending December 31, 1992.
Second Renewal of Contract, dated December 15,1992, for $20,000.00 ending April 30, 1993.
Third Renewal of Contract, dated June 9, 1993, for $30,000.00 with no ending date.
Fourth Renewal of Contract, dated November 2, 1993, for $50,000.00 with no ending date.
9- 'I
Renewal of Agreement with
Remy . and Thomas
for Legal Consulting Services
This Agreement is made this 1st day of December, 1993, for the purposes of reference
only, and effective as of the date last executed between the parties, between the City of Chula
Vista ("City") herein, a municipal corporation of the State of California, and Remy and Thomas,
a professional law firm ("Consultant"), and is made with reference to the following facts:
Recitals
Whereas, the City and County of San Diego desire to employ a law firm with expertise
and experience in reviewing environmental documents for compliance with the guidelines and
procedures of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in reference to the Otay Ranch
Project; and
Whereas, Consultant warrants and represents that they are experienced and staffed in a
manner such that they are and can prepare and deliver the services required of Consultant to
Agency within the time frames herein provided all in accordance with the terms and conditions
of this Agreement; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City and Consultant do hereby
mutually agree as follows:
1. Consultant's Duties
a. General Duties
1. Consultant shall review environmental documents prepared by the City or
their consultants consisting of a Program Environmental Impact Report for
compliance with CEQA and advise City/Otay Ranch Project Team staff
as to necessary and relevant changes that may be required; and
ll. Consultant shall provide guidance to City staff as to processing of all
supporting environmental documents to assure compliance with CEQA
requirements such as the Findings, Statement of Overriding Considerations
and Mitigation Monitoring Program; and
iii. Consultant shall provide legal advice to City staff to defend litigation
predicated upon alleged deficiencies in environmental documents or
improper processing of said documents.
1
9"S-
(the duties of the Consultant as herein in this section contained may hereinafter be
referred to as "General Duties"); and
b. Scope of Work and Schedule
Work assignments under this Agreement will be issued on an as needed basis.
The schedule will be agreed upon at the time that the tasks are assigned.
c. StandardofCIDre
Consultant, in performing any Services under this Agreement, whether Defined
Services or Additional Services, shall be performed in a manner consistent with
that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession
currently practicing under similar conditions and in similar locations.
d. Insurance
Consultant represents that it and its agents, staff and consultants employed by it
are protected by worker's compensation insurance and the Consultant has the
coverage under public liability, property damages and errors and omissions
insurance policies which this Agreement requires to be demonstrated in the form
of a certificate of insurance.
Consultant will provide, prior to the commencement of services required under
this Agreement, the following certificates of insurance to the Agency:
Statutory Worker's Compensation coverage plus $1,000,000.00 Employers
liability coverage.
General and Automobile Liability coverage to $1,000,000.00 combined single
limit, and which is primary to any policy which the Agency may otherwise carry
("primary coverage"), and which treats the employees of the Agency in the same
manner as members of the general public ("cross liability coverage").
All policies shall be issued by a carrier that has a Best's Rating of" A, Class V",
or better, or shall meet with the approval of the Agency's Risk Manager.
All policies shall provide that same may not be canceled without at least thirty
(30) days written notice to the Agency.
2
9-~
2. Duties of the City:
a. Consultation and Cooperation
City agrees to provide information, data, items, and materials as may be required
by Consultant in order to carry out Consultant's duties under this Agreement.
b. Compensation
I. The City hereby agrees to pay an hourly fee of $195.00 to attorneys
Michael H. Remy, Tina A. Thomas, J. William Yeates and James G.
Moose and an hourly fee of $150.00 to attorneys Whitman F. Manley,
Matthew R. Campbell and John H. Mattox. Services of Land Use
Analyst, Georganna Foondos, will be billed at the hourly rate of $75.00.
Time for research done by a law clerk or paralegal will be billed at an
hourly rate of $50.00. Attorney time for travel shall not be billed to City
unless same is also actively spent in the rendition of legal services.
11. In addition to the above attorney fees, City hereby agrees to pay to the
attorney all applicable costs, such as: filing fees, copying costs at $0.25
(25 cents) per copy, mileage costs at $0.35 (35 cents) per mile; printing
costs by a professional printer, as charged, long distance phone charges,
as charged; postage charges, as charged; reimbursement for lodging and
meal expenses in instances requiring out of county travel including but not
limited to any costs involving common carriers (e.g., airplane), and all
other agreed upon costs or expenses related to this matter.
lll. Consultant shall not incur costs or billings which, in total, exceed
$18,000.00 Thousand Dollars ($18,000.00) without further written
approval of the City. This amount does not reflect any work requested by
the City or completed on the City's behalf relating to potential litigation
of the project.
IV. It is understood that the City has established the Otay Ranch Trust Fund
to account for and pay all expenses from deposits made by the project
proponent, Baldwin Vista, Ltd. If there is a default of the proponent,
compensation for the services performed shall be paid only from deposited
monies and from no other asset or resource of the City, a special
obligation which is not a burden upon, or appropriated from, the General
Fund of the City.
3
9-7
c. Additional Scope of Work
In addition to performing the Defined Services herein set forth, City may require
Consultant to perform additional consulting services related to the General Duties
and Scope of Work ("Additional Services"), and upon doing so in writing,
Consultant shall perform same on a time and materials basis at the rates set forth
in Section 2b. All compensation for Additional Services shall be paid monthly
as billed.
3. Administration of Contract
The City hereby designates the Otay Manager, or his designee, as its representative for
the coordination and administration of the work performed by Consultant herein required.
Copy of all correspondence will be provided to the City Attorney, and important legal
decisions or conclusions will be reviewed by the City Attorney.
4. Term
Consultant shall perform all of the Defined Services herein required of it as may be
required until the billing of the cumulative total amount authorized under this Agreement
is reached.
5. Financial Interests of Consultant
Consultant warrants and represents that neither she, nor her immediate family members,
nor her employees or agents ("Consultant Associates") presently have any interest,
directly or indirectly, whatsoever in property which would constitute a conflict of interest
or give the appearance of such conflict in relation to the projects identified in this
Agreement.
Consultant further warrants and represents that no promise of future employment,
remuneration, consideration, gratuity or other reward or gain has been made to
Consultant or Consultant Associates. Consultant promises to advise City of any such
promise that may be made during the Term of this Agreement, or for 12 months
thereafter.
Consultant agrees that neither Consultant nor her immediate family members, nor her
employees or agents, shall acquire any such Prohibited Interest within the Term of this
Agreement, or for 12 months after the expiration of this Agreement.
Consultant may not conduct or solicit any business for any part to this Agreement, or for
any third party which may be in conflict with Consultant's responsibilities under this
Agreement.
4
9~~
6. Hold Harmless
Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City from and against all
liability, cost and expense (including without limitation attorneys' fees) arising from loss
of or damage to any property whatsoever or injury to or death of any person whomsoever
caused or alleged to be caused or occasioned by the negligent act or omission of
Consultant or any agent or employee of Consultant arising out of or in connection with
this Agreement or the work to be performed by Consultant hereunder, except to the
extent such liability, cost or expense is caused by the negligence of the City.
7. Termination of Agreement for Cause
If, through any cause, Consultant shall fail to fulfill in a timely and proper manner
his/her obligations under this Agreement, or if Consultant shall violate any of the
covenants, agreements or stipulations of this Agreement, City shall have the right to
terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to Consultant of such termination and
specifying the effective date thereof at least five (5) days before the effective date of such
termination. In that event, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys,
drawings, maps, reports and other materials prepared by Consultant shall, at the option
of the City, become the property of the City, and Consultant shall be entitled to receive
just and equitable compensation for any work satisfactorily completed on such documents
and other materials up to the effective date of Notice of Termination, not to exceed the
amount payable hereunder, and less any damages caused City by Consultant's breach.
8. Errors and Omissions
In the event that the City Manager or his designee determines that the Consultant's
negligence, errors, or omissions in the performance of work under this Agreement has
resulted in expense to City greater than would have resulted if there were no such
negligence, errors, omissions in the plans or contract specifications, Consultant and City
shall select a mutually acceptable arbitrator with legal and technical expertise in
preparing EIRs and in the application of CEQA to determine whether Agency shall be
reimbursed for the additional expenses incurred by the City including engineering,
construction and/or restoration expense. Nothing herein is intended to limit City's rights
under other provisions of this Agreement.
9. Termination of Agreement for Convenience of City
City may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any reason for giving specific
written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof,
at least thirty (30) days before the effective date of such termination. In that event, all
finished and unfinished documents and other materials described hereinabove shall, at the
option of the City, become City's sole and exclusive property. If the Agreement is
terminated by City as provided in this paragraph, Consultant shall be entitled to receive
5
9-'1
just an equitable compensation for any satisfactory work completed on such documents
and other materials to the effective date of such termination. Consultant hereby expressly
waives any and all claims for damages or compensation arising under this Agreement
except as set forth herein.
10. Assignability
The services of Consultant are personal to the City, and Consultant shall not assign any
interest in this Agreement, and shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by
assignment or novation), without prior written consent of City which City may
unreasonable deny.
11. Ownership, Publication, Reproduction and Use of Material
All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms, designs, plans, procedures,
systems and any other materials or properties produced under this Agreement shall be
the sole and exclusive property of the City. No such materials or properties produced
in whole or in part under this Agreement shall be subject to private use, copyrights or
patent rights by Consultant in the United States or in any other county without the
express written consent of Agency. City shall have unrestricted authority to publish,
disclose as may be limited by the provisions of the Public Records Act, distribute, and
otherwise use, copyright or patent, in whole or in part, any such reports, studies, data,
statistics, forms or other materials or properties produced under this Agreement.
12. Independent Contractor
City is interested only in the results obtained and Consultant shall perform as an
independent contract with sole control of the manner and means of performing the
services required under this Agreement. City maintains the right only to reject or accept
Consultant's work products. Consultant and any of the Consultant's agents, employees
or representatives are, for all purposes under this Agreement, an independent contractor
and shall not be deemed to be an employee .of the City, and none of them shall be
entitled to any benefits to which City employees are entitled including, but not limited,
overtime, retirement benefits, workers compensation benefits, injury leave or other leave
benefits.
13. Responsible Charge
Consultant hereby designates Tina A. Thomas shall be Consultant's representative
("Project Manager") to the project for the duration of the project. No substitution for
this position shall be allowed without written approval from the City.
6
9-/0
14. Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures
No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this Agreement against the Agency
unless a claim has first been presented in writing and filed with the Agency of the City
of Chula Vista and acted upon in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter
1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, as same may from time to time be amended,
the provisions of which are incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein, and
such policies and procedures used by the City in the implementation of same.
Upon request by City, Consultant shall meet and confer in good faith with Agency for
the purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement.
15. Statement of Costs
In the event that Consultant prepares a report or document, or participates in the
preparation of a report or document as a result of the scope of work required of
Consultant, Consultant shall include, or cause the inclusion, in said report or document
a statement of the numbers and cost in dollar amounts of all contracts and subcontracts
relating to the preparation of the report or document.
16. Miscellaneous
a. Consultant Not Authorized to Represent City
Unless specifically authorized in writing by Agency, Consultant shall have no
authority to act as City's agent to bind City to any contractual agreements
whatsoever.
b. Notices
All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted to be given pursuant
to this Agreement must be in writing. _ All notices, demands and requests to be
sent to any party shall be deemed to have been properly given or served if
personally served or deposited in the United States mail, addressed to such party,
postage prepaid, registered or certified, with return receipt requested, at the
address identified adjacent to the signatures of the parties represented.
c. Entire Agreement
This Agreement, together with any other written document referred to or
contemplated herein, embody the entire Agreement and understanding between
the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. Neither this Agreement nor any
provision hereof may be amended, modified, waived or discharged except by an
7
9'1/
instrument in writing executed by the part against which enforcement of such
amendment, waiver or discharge is sought.
d. Capacity of Parties
Each signatory and party hereto hereby warrants and represents to the other party
that it has legal authority and capacity and direction form its principal to enter
into this Agreement; that all resolutions or other actions have been taken so as to
enable it to enter into this Agreement.
e. Governing Law/Venue
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws
of the State of California. Any action arising under or relating to this Agreement
shall be brought only in the federal or state courts located in San Diego County,
State of California, and if applicable, the City of Chula Vista, or as close thereto
as possible. Venue for this Agreement, and performance hereunder, shall be the
City of Chula Vista.
f. Attorney Fees
Should a dispute result in litigation, it is agreed that the prevailing party shall be
entitled to recover all reasonable costs incurred in the defense of that claim,
including costs and attorney fees.
[End of page. Next page is signature page.]
8
9~/oZ
Signature Page to
Agreement with Remy and Thomas
for Legal Consulting Services
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this Agreement this _
day of , 1993.
Attest:
Beverly Authelet
City Clerk
Ai?:f;r:l
Bruce M. Boogard,
City Attorney
. 3121396.(XH\RETAINER
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
By:
Tim Nader
Mayor
Remy and Thomas
By: kC/ Jh~
Tina A. Thomas
9
9-/3
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
ItJ
xeetinq Date 1/4/94
ITEM TITLE: Resolution 1?.3 Lj 7 Approving Agreement with Remy
and Thomas for Litigation Representation Services
SUBMITTED BY: ~ssistant City Attorney Rudolf
4/sths Vote: Yes
No~
When the City of Chula vista and County of San Diego approved the
final version of the otay Ranch Project, part of the approval was
an indemnification agreement by otay vista Associates, indemnifying
the city and the County in the event of an attack on the project
approval. Chapparal Greens and Daniel Tarr have sued the city and
the County and Baldwin, alleging inadequacies in the final program
EIR and/or violation~ of CEQA.
Approval of the resolution and agreement will authorize Tina Thomas
of Remy and Thomas to represent the City in that litigation at
Baldwin's expense.
RECOKKENDATION: Approve the attached resolution ratifying the
City's agreement with Remy and Thomas for legal representation in
the Chapparal Greens litigation subsequent to service of process in
that matter on December 1, 1993.
BOARDS/COKKISSIONS RECOKKENDATION: N/A.
DISCUSSION:
Approval of the resolution will effectuate the indemnification
agreement Council approved upon final approval of the otay Ranch
Project. The agreement provides for representation by Tina Thomas
of Remy and Thomas, the attorney who has provided advice with
regard to compliance with CEQA and the adequacy of the EIR
throughout the entire planning process. Both the ci tyand the
County are named as Real Parties in Interest in the litigation, and
the responsible defendant is the Baldwin Company, through its
corporate entity, otay vista Associates.
FISCAL IMPACT: None, the agreement calls for all payments to be
made by the Baldwin Company and the establishment of a deposit
account so that the City has no funds exposed for payment of
attorney's fees in this matter.
C:\A113\CbaparrI)
ICJ-I
RESOLUTION NO.
/73'-11
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH REMY AND
THOMAS FOR LITIGATION REPRESENTATION SERVICES
IN CONNECTION WITH THE CHAPPARAL GREENS
LAWSUIT, AND AUTHORIZING MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAME
WHEREAS, the City desires to employ a law firm with
expertise and experience in reviewing environmental documents for
compliance with the guidelines and procedures of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA litigation in reference
to Otay vista Associates' Otay Ranch Project; and
WHEREAS, Otay vista Associates is required by an
Indemnity Agreement to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the city
regarding any litigation arising from City's approval of the Otay
Ranch Project, including paYment for legal counsel to represent
city in such litigation; and
WHEREAS, Remy and Thomas warrants that they are
experienced and staffed in a manner such that they are and can
prepare and deliver the services required within the time frames
herein provided all in accordance with the terms and conditions of
the Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby approve an Agreement with Remy
and Thomas for Litigation Representation Services in connection
with the Chapparal Greens lawsuit, a copy of which is on file in
the office of the city Clerk.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the city of
Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said
Agreement for and on behalf of the City of Chula vista.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
D. Richard Rudolf, Assistant
city Attorney
+;
, city
F: \home\aUomey\remy .co
/1)-02/ {O~3
~~~
L~~
--' --' --'--'
----
--..,.,.-
CllY OF
CHULA VISTA
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
December 29, 1993
From:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
\~~ Richard Rudolf, Assistant City Attorney
To:
Re:
Agenda Item No. 10 - Resolution Approving Agreement
with Remy & Thomas for Litigation Representation Services
in Connection with the Chapparal Greens Lawsuit
Due to the closure of Baldwin's offices for the Christmas holidays,
as of today' s date, they have not executed the above agreement. It
is anticipated that Baldwin will be signing the agreement on
Monday, January 3, 1994, which executed copy will be presented to
Council at its January 4, 1994 meeting.
If for any reason, said agreement is not executed prior to the
Council meeting, the City Attorney's office will continue the item
for an additional week.
DRR: 19k
cc: City Manager
City Clerk
F:\home\attomey\chapgl'Cal.~
)!J-3
276 FOURTH AVE/CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910/(619) 691-5037
<'''''. '._.'_h"_"~".~~'_'_"_"~"__'___.""""'-'__------_._-'-----
Agreement with
Remy and Thomas
for Litigation Representation Services
This Agreement is made this 1st day of December
1993 for the purposes of reference only, and effective as of the
date last executed between the parties, between the city of Chula
vista ("city") herein, a chartered municipal corporation of the
State of California, Remy and Thomas, a professional law firm
("Consultant"), and Otay vista Associates, a California Limited
Partnership ("Developer"), and is made with reference to the
following facts:
Recitals
Whereas, the City desires to employ a law firm with
expertise and experience in reviewing environmental documents for
compliance with the guidelines and procedures of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA litigation in reference
to Developer's Otay Ranch project; and
Whereas, Developer is required by an Indemnity Agreement to
defend, indemnify and hold harmless the city regarding any
litigation arising from City's approval of the Otay Ranch
Project, including paYment for legal counsel to represent City in
such litigation; and
Whereas, Consultant warrants and represents that they are
experienced and staffed in a manner such that they are and can
prepare and deliver the services required of Consultant to City
within the time frames herein provided all in accordance with the
terms and conditions ,of this Agreement; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City, consultant,
and Developer do hereby mutually agree as follows:
1. Consultant's Duties
a. General Duties
i. Consultant shall provide legal advice to defend City in
litigation predicated upon alleged deficiencies in environmental
documents or improper processing of said documents in relation to
the Otay Ranch Project.
(the duties of the Consultant as herein in this section contained
may hereinafter be referred to as "General Duties"); and, . . .
b. Scope of Work and Schedule
Work assignments under this Agreement will be issued on an
1
/tl-,/
as needed basis. The schedule will be agreed upon at the time
that the tasks are assigned in consultation with Developer.
c. Standard of Care
Consultant's performance of any Services under this
Agreement, whether Defined Services or Additional Services, shall
be in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill
ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently
practicing under similar conditions and in similar locations.
d. Insurance
Consultant represents that it and its agents, staff and
consultants employed by it are protected by worker's compensation
insurance and that the Consultant has the coverage under public
liability, property damage and errors and omissions insurance
policies which this Agreement requires to be demonstrated in the
form of a certificate of insurance.
Consultant will provide, prior to the commencement of the
services required under this Agreement the following certificates
of insurance to the City prior to beginning work:
Statutory Worker's Compensation coverage plus $1,000,000
Employers liability coverage.
General and Automobile Liability coverage to $1,000,000
combined single limit, and which is primary to any policy which
the city may otherwise carry ("primary coverage"), and which
treats the employees of the City in the same manner as members of
the general public ("cross-liability coverage").
All policies shall be issued by a carrier that has a Best's
Rating of "A, Class V", or better, or shall meet with the
approval of the city's Risk Manager.
All policies shall provide that same may not be canceled
without at least thirty (30) days written notice to the City.
2. Duties of the City:
a. Consultation and Cooperation
City agrees to provide information, data, items, and
materials as may be required by Consultant in order to carry out
Consultant's duties under this Agreement.
b. Compensation
i. The City hereby agrees to pay an hourly fee of $195.00
per hour to attorneys Michael H. Remy, Tina A. Thomas, and J.
2
//J--S
william Yeates, and James G. Moose and an hourly fee of $150.00
per hour to attorneys Whit Manley, Matt Campbell, John Mattox
and/or Jane Manolalas. Services of Staff Planner, Georganne
Foondos, will be billed at the hourly rate of $75.00 per hour.
Time for research done by a law clerk or paralegal will be billed
at an hourly rate of $50.00 per hour.
ii. In addition to the above attorney fees, City hereby
agrees to pay to the attorneys all applicable costs, such as:
filing fees, copying costs at $0.15 (.15 cents) per copy, mileage
costs at $0.27 (.27 cents) per mile; printing costs by a
professional printer, as charged, long distance phone charges, as
charged; postage charges, as charged; reimbursement for lodging
and meal expenses in instances requiring out of county travel,
including but not limited to any costs involving common carriers
(e.g., airplane), and any other agreed upon costs or expenses
related to this matter.
~~~. The City hereby agrees that City will advance all
costs incident to the performance of said services; however, if
the Consultant should advance such costs, the City agrees to
reimburse the Consultant therefore upon demand.
iv. Consultant shall not incur costs or billings which, in
total, exceed Thirty ,Thousand Dollars ($75,000.00) without
further written approval of the City.
c. Additional Scope of Work
In addition to performing the Defined Services herein set
forth, city may require Consultant to perform additional
consulting services related to the General Duties and Scope of
Work ("Additional Services"), and upon doing so in writing,
Consultant shall perform same on a time and materials basis at
the rates set forth in section 2b. All compensation for
Additional Services shall be paid monthly as billed.
d. Payment contingent
city's payment of Consultant is contingent upon payment to
City by Developer in accordance with this Agreement.
3. Duties of Developer
a. Developer shall compensate City for all services
rendered by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement. Developer
shall not make any payments of compensation or otherwise directly
to Consultant. Consultant invoices shall be forwarded by City to
Developer for review. Any Developer objections shall be
forwarded to City in writing within ten (10) days of Developer's
receipt of invoice. Developer shall pay the amount of all
unobjected to invoice items to City, within fifteen (15) days of
3
/?J~t
receipt of billing from city, not more frequently than monthly,
or in accordance with the security deposit provisions following;
and, upon paYment to City, City shall promptly, not later than
fifteen (15) days, pay said amount to Consultant.
b. Deposit
As security for the paYment of Consultant by City,
Developer shall, upon execution of this Agreement, deposit the
amount of $15,000 as ."Deposit Amount" with the City, as trustee
for Consultant, the conditions of such trust as hereinbelow set
forth:
(1) Other Terms of Deposit Trust.
(a) City shall also be entitled to retain from said
Deposit all costs incurred by City for which it is entitled to
compensation by law or under the terms of this agreement.
(b) All interest earned on the Deposit Amount, if any,
shall accrue to the benefit of, and be used for, Trust purposes.
city may, in lieu of deposit into a separate bank account,
separately account for said deposit in one or more of its various
bank accounts, and upon doing so, shall proportionately
distribute to the Deposit Trust, the average interest earned
during the period on its general fund.
(c) Any unused balance of Deposit Amount, including
any unused interest earned, shall be returned to Developer not
later than 30 days after the termination of this Agreement and
any claims resulting therefrom.
(d) Developer shall be notified within 30 days after
of the use of the Deposit in any manner. Nothing herein shall
invalidate use of the Deposit in the manner herein authorized.
(e) At such time as City shall reasonably determine
that inadequate funds remain on Deposit to secure future
compensation likely due Consultant or city, City may make demand
of Developer to supplement said Deposit Amount in such amount as
city shall reasonably specify, and upon doing so, Developer
shall, within 30 days, pay said amount ("Supplemental Deposit
Amount") to City. said Supplement Deposit Amount or Amounts
shall be governed by the same terms of trust governing the
original Deposit.
(2) Withholding of Assistance.
In addition to use of the Deposit as security, in order
to secure the duty of Developer to pay City for Consultant's
Services rendered under this agreement, City shall be entitled to
withhold City assistance to joint defense of the litigation upon
4
/Ll,-7
a breach of Developer's duty to indemnify. Additionally, any
representation of city by Consultant after Developer's breach
continues to be at Developer's sole cost and expense.
4. Term
Consultant shall perform all of the Defined Services herein
required of it as may be required from December 1, 1993 until the
earlier of the billing of the cumulative total amount authorized
under this Agreement, or June 30, 1995.
5. Financial Interests of Consultant
Consultant warrants and represents that neither she, nor her
immediate family members, nor her employees or agents
("Consultant Associates") presently have any interest, directly
or indirectly, whatsoever in property which would constitute a
conflict of interest or give the appearance of such conflict in
relation to the projects identified in this Agreement.
Consultant further warrants and represents that no promise
of future emploYment, remuneration, consideration, gratuity or
other reward or gain has been made to Consultant or Consultant
Associates. Consultant promises to advise City of any such
promise that may be made during the Term of this Agreement, or
for 12 months thereafter.
Consultant agrees that neither Consultant nor her immediate
family members, nor her employees or agents, shall acquire any
such Prohibited Interest within the Term of this Agreement, or
for 12 months after the expiration of this Agreement.
Consultant may not conduct or solicit any business for any
party to this Agreement, or for any third party which may be in
conflict with consultant's responsibilities under this Agreement.
6. Hold Harmless
Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless
the City and Developer from and against all liability, cost and
expense (including without limitation attorneys' fees) arising
from any claims for damages of any kind, including loss of or
damage to any property whatsoever or injury to or death of any
person whomsoever caused or alleged to be caused or occasioned by
the negligent act or omission of Consultant or any agent or
employee of Consultant arising out of or in connection with this
Agreement or the work to be performed by Consultant hereunder,
except to the extent such liability, cost or expense is caused by
the negligence of the city.
5
/tJ-~
7. Termination of Agreement for Cause
If, through any cause, Consultant shall fail to fulfill in a
timely and proper manner his/her obligations under this
Agreement, or if Consultant shall violate any of the covenants,
agreements or stipulations of this Agreement, City shall have the
right to terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to
Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date
thereof at least jive (5) days before the effective date of such
termination. In that event, all finished or unfinished documents,
data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, reports and other
materials prepared by Consultant shall, at the option of the
City, become the property of the City, and Consultant shall be
entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any work
satisfactorily completed on such documents and other materials up
to the effective date of Notice of Termination, not to exceed the
amounts payable hereunder, and less any damages caused City by
Consultant's breach.
8. Errors and Omissions
In the event that the City Attorney determines that the
Consultant's negligence, errors, or omissions in the performance
of work under this Agreement has resulted in expense to City
greater than would have resulted if there were no such
negligence, errors, omissions in the plans or contract
specifications, Consultant and City shall select a mutually
acceptable arbitrator with legal and technical expertise in CEQA
litigation to determine whether City shall be reimbursed for the
additional expenses incurred by the City. Nothing herein is
intended to limit City'S rights under other provisions of this
Agreement. Any sums deducted or collected hereunder shall be
credited to or passed on to Developer.
9. Termination of Agreement for Convenience of city
City may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any
reason for giving specific written notice to Consultant and
Developer of such termination and specifying the effective date
thereof, at least thirty (30) days before the effective date of
such termination. In that event, all finished and unfinished
documents and other materials described hereinabove shall, at the
option of the City, become City's sole and exclusive property. If
the Agreement is terminated by City as provided in this
paragraph, Consultant shall be entitled to receive from city,paid
by Developer, just a~d equitable compensation for any
satisfactory work completed on such documents and other materials
to the effective date of such termination. Consultant hereby
expressly waives any and all claims for damages or compensation
arising under this Agreement except as set forth herein.
6
/IJ-(
10. Termination at the Request of Developer
Developer may terminate Developer's obligations with respect
to this agreement at any time and for any reason by giving
written notice to CITY of such intent to terminate said agreement
and specifying an effective date of such termination at least
thirty (30) days before the date of termination. Immediately
upon receipt of the notice of termination, consultant shall
terminate all work under this agreement. In the event that
Developer shall terminate the terms of this agreement, Developer
shall remain liable for all work undertaken up to and including
the effective date of said termination for which City shall be
entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for
satisfactory work performed by Consultant due and owing pursuant
to Paragraph 3 hereinabove.
11. Assignability
The services of Consultant are personal to the City, and
Consultant shall not assign any interest in this Agreement, and
shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by
assignment or novation), without prior written consent of City
which City may unreasonably deny.
12. Independent Contractor
City is interested only in the results obtained and
Consultant shall perform as an independent contractor with sole
control of the manner and means of performing the services
required under this Agreement. city maintains the right only to
reject or accept Consultant's work products. Consultant and any
of the Consultant's agents, employees or representatives are, for
all purposes under this Agreement, an independent contractor and
shall not be deemed to be an employee of City, and none of them
shall be entitled to any benefits to which City employees are
entitled including but not limited to, overtime, retirement
benefits, worker's compensation benefits, injury leave or other
leave benefits.
13. Administrative Responsibilities
Consultant hereby designates that Tina A. Thomas shall be
Consultant's representative ("Project Manager") to the project
for the duration of the project. No substitution for this
position shall be allowed without written approval from the City.
city hereby designates City Attorney Bruce Boogaard, or
designee, to be City'S representative. Developer hereby
designates Greg smith as its representative.
7
/tJ~/??
14. Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures
No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this
Agreement, against the city unless a claim has first been
presented in writing and filed with the City of Chula vista and
acted upon in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter
1.34 of the Chula vista Municipal Code, as same may from time to
time be amended, the provisions of which are incorporated by this
reference as if fully set forth herein, and such policies and
procedures used by the City in the implementation of same.
Upon request by City, Consultant shall meet and confer in
good faith with City for the purpose of resolving any dispute
over the terms of this Agreement.
15. Attorney's Fees
Should that dispute result in litigation, it is agree that
the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover all reasonable
costs incurred in the defense of the claim, including costs and
attorney's fees.
16. Miscellaneous
a. Consultant not authorized to Represent City
Unless specifically authorized in writing by City,
Consultant shall have no authority to act as City's agent to bind
City to any contractual agreements whatsoever.
b. ( ) Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman
If the foregoing box is marked, the Consultant and/or their
principals is/are licensed with the State of California or some
other state as a licensed real estate broker or salesperson.
c. Notices
All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted
to be given pursuant to this Agreement must be in writing. All
notices, demands and requests to be sent to any party shall be
deemed to have been properly given or served if personally served
or deposited in the United States mail, addressed to such party,
postage prepaid, registered or certified, with return receipt
requested, at the addresses identified adjacent to the signatures
of the parties represented.
d. Entire Agreement
This Agreement, together with any other written document
referred to or contemplated herein, embody the entire Agreement
and understanding between the parties relating to the subject
8
/11--//
matter hereof. Neither this Agreement nor any provision hereof
may be amended, modified, waived or discharged except by an
instrument in writing executed by the party against which
enforcement of such amendment, waiver or discharge is sought.
e. Capacity of Parties
Each signatory and party hereto hereby warrants and
represents to the other party that it has legal authority and
capacity and direction from its principal to enter into this
Agreement; that all resolutions or other actions have been taken
so as to enable it to enter into this Agreement.
f. Governing Law/Venue
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in
accordance with the laws of the state of California. Any action
arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought only
in the federal or state courts located in San Diego County, state
of California, and if applicable, the City of Chula Vista, or as
close thereto as possible. Venue for this Agreement, and
performance hereunder, shall be the City of Chula vista.
[end of page. next page is signature page.]
9
/fl-/~
01104194 15:05 ft619 431 9512
JAN- 4-94 TUE 10:56 OITY OF OHULA UIST~
FAX NO. 58bb612
Igj uu,:;
P.02
.
S1vnatura Page to
Agreement with Ray and Thomas
~or Litiqat10ft Representation
Xli wrrNESS WHEREOF, City, Consultant, and Developer have
ezecute4 'this Agreement this day of >>eceWlber, 1993.
CITY 01' CKOLA VISTA
By.
Ti1ft Na4er
Mayor
A1:bas-e:
city elerlc
App~ovecl IUS to form;
~. f~J<'
Bruce II. Boo
eit.y Attorney
B
Ray and Thoaas
--
By; kd &, )~~~
Tina A. Th~U
(C~1a)
10
It) ~/3
...S.~'i.-3 N (.":) i\j f2<<? e {f\C :,,'-r
:[1 t (1\ I 0
Agreement with
Remy and Thomas
for Litigation Representation Services
This Agreement is made this 1st day of December
1993 for the purposes of reference only, and effective as of the
date last executed between the parties, between the City of Chula
Vista ("City") herein, a chartered municipal corporation of the
State of California, Remy and Thomas, a professional law firm
("Consultant"), and Otay vista Associates, a California Limited
Partnership ("Developer"), and is made with reference to the
following facts:
Recitals
Whereas, the City desires to employ a law firm with
expertise and experience in reviewing environmental documents for
compliance with the guidelines and procedures of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA litigation in reference
to Developer's Otay Ranch Project; and
Whereas, Developer is required by an Indemnity Agreement to
defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City regarding any
litigation arising from City's approval of the Otay Ranch
Project, including payment for legal counsel to represent City in
such litigation; and
Whereas, Consultant warrants and represents that they are
experienced and staffed in a manner such that they are and can
prepare and deliver the services required of Consultant to City
within the time frames herein provided all in accordance with the
terms and conditions .of this Agreement; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City, Consultant,
and Developer do hereby mutually agree as follows:
1. Consultant's Duties
a. General Duties
i. Consultant shall provide legal advice to defend City in
litigation predicated upon alleged deficiencies in environmental
documents or improper processing of said documents in relation to
the Otay Ranch Project.
(the duties of the Consultant as herein in this section contained
may hereinafter be referred to as "General Duties"); and, . . .
b. Scope of Work and Schedule
Work assignments under this Agreement will be issued on an
1
/t/'/J~
as needed basis. The schedule will be agreed upon at the time
that the tasks are assigned in consultation with Developer.
c. Standard of Care
Consultant's performance of any Services under this
Agreement, whether Defined Services or Additional Services, shall
be in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill
ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently
practicing under similar conditions and in similar locations.
d. Insurance
Consultant represents that it and its agents, staff and
consultants employed by it are protected by worker's compensation
insurance and that the Consultant has the coverage under public
liability, property damage and errors and omissions insurance
policies which this Agreement requires to be demonstrated in the
form of a certificate of insurance.
Consultant will provide, prior to the commencement of the
services required under this Agreement the following certificates
of insurance to the City prior to beginning work:
Statutory Worker's Compensation coverage plus $1,000,000
Employers liability coverage.
General and Automobile Liability coverage to $1,000,000
combined single limit, and which is primary to any policy which
the City may otherwise carry ("primary coverage"), and which
treats the employees of the City in the same manner as members of
the general public ("cross-liability coverage").
All policies shall be issued by a carrier that has a Best's
Rating of "A, Class V", or better, or shall meet with the
approval of the City's Risk Manager.
All policies shall provide that same may not be canceled
without at least thirty (30) days written notice to the City.
2. Duties of the city:
a. Consultation and Cooperation
City agrees to provide information, data, items, and
materials as may be required by Consultant in order to carry out
Consultant's duties under this Agreement.
b. Compensation
i. The City hereby agrees to pay an hourly fee of $195.00
per hour to attorneys Michael H. Remy, Tina A. Thomas, and J.
2
/f}/j?
william Yeates, and James G. Moose and an hourly fee of $150.00
per hour to attorneys Whit Manley, Matt Campbell, John Mattox
and/or Jane Manolalas. Services of Staff Planner, Georganne
Foondos, will be billed at the hourly rate of $75.00 per hour.
Time for research done by a law clerk or paralegal will be billed
at an hourly rate of $50.00 per hour.
ii. In addition to the above attorney fees, City hereby
agrees to pay to the attorneys all applicable costs, such as:
filing fees, copying costs at $0.15 (.15 cents) per copy, mileage
costs at $0.27 (.27 cents) per mile; printing costs by a
professional printer, as charged, long distance phone charges, as
charged; postage charges, as charged; reimbursement for lodging
and meal expenses in instances requiring out of county travel,
including but not limited to any costs involving common carriers
(e.g., airplane), and any other agreed upon costs or expenses
related to this matter.
111. The City hereby agrees that City will advance all
costs incident to the performance of said services; however, if
the Consultant should advance such costs, the city agrees to
reimburse the Consultant therefore upon demand.
iv. Consultant shall not incur costs or billings which, in
total, exceed Thirty ,Thousand Dollars ($75,000.00) without
further written approval of the city.
c. Additional Scope of Work
In addition to performing the Defined Services herein set
forth, city may require Consultant to perform additional
consulting services related to the General Duties and Scope of
Work ("Additional Services"), and upon doing so in writing,
Consultant shall perform same on a time and materials basis at
the rates set forth in section 2b. All compensation for
Additional Services shall be paid monthly as billed.
d. PaYment Contingent
City's paYment of Consultant is contingent upon paYment to
city by Developer in accordance with this Agreement.
3. Duties of Developer
a. Developer shall compensate City for all services
rendered by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement. Developer
shall not make any paYments of compensation or otherwise directly
to Consultant. Consultant invoices shall be forwarded by City to
Developer for review. Any Developer objections shall be
forwarded to City in writing within ten (10) days of Developer's
receipt of invoice. Developer shall pay the amount of all
unobjected to invoice items to City, within fifteen (15) days of
3
/ tJ~/ 7
receipt of billing from city, not more frequently than monthly,
or in accordance with the security deposit provisions following;
and, upon paYment to City, City shall promptly, not later than
fifteen (15) days, pay said amount to Consultant.
b. Deposit
As security for the paYment of Consultant by City,
Developer shall, upon execution of this Agreement, deposit the
amount of $15,000 as -"Deposit Amount" with the City, as trustee
for Consultant, the conditions of such trust as hereinbelow set
forth:
(1) Other Terms of Deposit Trust.
(a) City shall also be entitled to retain from said
Deposit all costs incurred by City for which it is entitled to
compensation by law or under the terms of this agreement.
(b) All interest earned on the Deposit Amount, if any,
shall accrue to the benefit of, and be used for, Trust purposes.
city may, in lieu of deposit into a separate bank account,
separately account for said deposit in one or more of its various
bank accounts, and upon doing so, shall proportionately
distribute to the Deposit Trust, the average interest earned
during the period on its general fund.
(c) Any unused balance of Deposit Amount, including
any unused interest earned, shall be returned to Developer not
later than 30 days after the termination of this Agreement and
any claims resulting therefrom.
(d) Developer shall be notified within 30 days after
of the use of the Deposit in any manner. Nothing herein shall
invalidate use of the Deposit in the manner herein authorized.
(e) At such time as City shall reasonably determine
that inadequate funds remain on Deposit to secure future
compensation likely due Consultant or City, City may make demand
of Developer to supplement said Deposit Amount in such amount as
city shall reasonably specify, and upon doing so, Developer
shall, within 30 days, pay said amount ("Supplemental Deposit
Amount") to City. Said Supplement Deposit Amount or Amounts
shall be governed by the same terms of trust governing the
original Deposit.
(2) Withholding of Assistance.
In addition to use of the Deposit as security, in order
to secure the duty of Developer to pay City for Consultant's
Services rendered under this agreement, City shall be entitled to
withhold City assistance to joint defense of the litigation upon
4
)C ~/ r
a breach of Developer's duty to indemnify. Additionally, any
representation of City by Consultant after Developer's breach
continues to be at Developer's sole cost and expense.
4 . Term
Consultant shall perform all of the Defined Services herein
required of it as may be required from December 1, 1993 until the
earlier of the billing of the cumulative total amount authorized
under this Agreement, or June 30, 1995.
5. Financial Interests of Consultant
Consultant warrants and represents that neither she, nor her
immediate family members, nor her employees or agents
("Consultant Associates") presently have any interest, directly
or indirectly, whatsoever in property which would constitute a
conflict of interest or give the appearance of such conflict in
relation to the projects identified in this Agreement.
Consultant further warrants and represents that no promise
of future emplOYment, remuneration, consideration, gratuity or
other reward or gain has been made to Consultant or Consultant
Associates. Consultant promises to advise City of any such
promise that may be made during the Term of this Agreement, or
for 12 months thereafter.
Consultant agrees that neither Consultant nor her immediate
family members, nor her employees or agents, shall acquire any
such Prohibited Interest within the Term of this Agreement, or
for 12 months after the expiration of this Agreement.
Consultant may not conduct or solicit any business for any
party to this Agreement, or for any third party which may be in
conflict with Consultant's responsibilities under this Agreement.
6. Hold Harmless
Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless
the city and Developer from and against all liability, cost and
expense (including without limitation attorneys' fees) arising
from any claims for damages of any kind, including loss of or
damage to any property whatsoever or injury to or death of any
person whomsoever caused or alleged to be caused or occasioned by
the negligent act or omission of Consultant or any agent or
employee of Consultant arising out of or in connection with this
Agreement or the work to be performed by Consultant hereunder,
except to the extent such liability, cost or expense is caused by
the negligence of the City.
5
)j)//;
7. Termination of Agreement for Cause
If, through any cause, Consultant shall fail to fulfill in a
timely and proper manner his/her obligations under this
Agreement, or if Consultant shall violate any of the covenants,
agreements or stipulations of this Agreement, City shall have the
right to terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to
Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date
thereof at least jive (5) days before the effective date of such
termination. In that event, all finished or unfinished documents,
data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, reports and other
materials prepared by Consultant shall, at the option of the
City, become the property of the City, and Consultant shall be
entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any work
satisfactorily completed on such documents and other materials up
to the effective date of Notice of Termination, not to exceed the
amounts payable hereunder, and less any damages caused City by
Consultant's breach.
8. Errors and Omissions
In the event that the City Attorney determines that the
Consultant's negligence, errors, or omissions in the performance
of work under this Agreement has resulted in expense to City
greater than would have resulted if there were no such
negligence, errors, omissions in the plans or contract
specifications, Consultant and City shall select a mutually
acceptable arbitrator with legal and technical expertise in CEQA
litigation to determine whether City shall be reimbursed for the
additional expenses incurred by the City. Nothing herein is
intended to limit City's rights under other provisions of this
Agreement. Any sums deducted or collected hereunder shall be
credited to or passed on to Developer.
9. Termination of Agreement for Convenience of City
City may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any
reason for giving specific written notice to Consultant and
Developer of such termination and specifying the effective date
thereof, at least thirty (30) days before the effective date of
such termination. In that event, all finished and unfinished
documents and other materials described hereinabove shall, at the
option of the City, become city's sole and exclusive property. If
the Agreement is terminated by City as provided in this
paragraph, Consultant shall be entitled to receive from city,paid
by Developer, just a~d equitable compensation for any
satisfactory work completed on such documents and other materials
to the effective date of such termination. Consultant hereby
expressly waives any and all claims for damages or compensation
arising under this Agreement except as set forth herein.
6
n~
10. Termination at the Request of Developer
Developer may terminate Developer's obligations with respect
to this agreement at any time and for any reason by giving
written notice to CITY of such intent to terminate said agreement
and specifying an effective date of such termination at least
thirty (30) days before the date of termination. Immediately
upon receipt of the notice of termination, consultant shall
terminate all work under this agreement. In the event that
Developer shall terminate the terms of this agreement, Developer
shall remain liable for all work undertaken up to and including
the effective date of said termination for which city shall be
entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for
satisfactory work performed by Consultant due and owing pursuant
to Paraqraph 3 hereinabove.
11. Assignability
The services of Consultant are personal to the City, and
Consultant shall not assign any interest in this Agreement, and
shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by
assignment or novation), without prior written consent of City
which city may unreasonably deny.
12. Independent Contractor
City is interested only in the results obtained and
Consultant shall perform as an independent contractor with sole
control of the manner and means of performing the services
required under this Agreement. City maintains the right only to
reject or accept Consultant's work products. Consultant and any
of the Consultant's agents, employees or representatives are, for
all purposes under this Agreement, an independent contractor and
shall not be deemed to be an employee of City, and none of them
shall be entitled to any benefits to which City employees are
entitled including but not limited to, overtime, retirement
benefits, worker's compensation benefits, injury leave or other
leave benefits.
13. Administrative Responsibilities
Consultant hereby designates that Tina A. Thomas shall be
Consultant's representative ("Project Manager") to the project
for the duration of the project. No substitution for this
position shall be allowed without written approval from the city.
City hereby designates City Attorney Bruce Boogaard, or
designee, to be city's representative. Developer hereby
designates Greg Smith as its representative.
7
/fJ rc2 /
14. Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures
No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this
Agreement, against the City unless a claim has first been
presented in writing and filed with the City of Chula Vista and
acted upon in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter
1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, as same may from time to
time be amended, the provisions of which are incorporated by this
reference as if fully set forth herein, and such policies and
procedures used by the City in the implementation of same.
Upon request by City, Consultant shall meet and confer in
good faith with City for the purpose of resolving any dispute
over the terms of this Agreement.
15. Attorney's Fees
Should that dispute result in litigation, it is agree that
the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover all reasonable
costs incurred in the defense of the claim, including costs and
attorney's fees.
16. Miscellaneous
a. Consultant not authorized to Represent City
Unless specifically authorized in writing by City,
Consultant shall have no authority to act as City's agent to bind
city to any contractual agreements whatsoever.
b. ( ) Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman
If the foregoing box is marked, the Consultant and/or their
principals is/are licensed with the State of California or some
other state as a licensed real estate broker or salesperson.
c. Notices
All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted
to be given pursuant to this Agreement must be in writing. All
notices, demands and requests to be sent to any party shall be
deemed to have been properly given or served if personally served
or deposited in the united States mail, addressed to such party,
postage prepaid, registered or certified, with return receipt
requested, at the addresses identified adjacent to the signatures
of the parties represented.
d. Entire Agreement
This Agreement, together with any other written document
referred to or contemplated herein, embody the entire Agreement
and understanding between the parties relating to the sUbject
8
JtJ ~c2A
matter hereof. Neither this Agreement nor any provision hereof
may be amended, modified, waived or discharged except by an
instrument in writing executed by the party against which
enforcement of such amendment, waiver or discharge is sought.
e. Capacity of Parties
Each signatory and party hereto hereby warrants and
represents to the other party that it has legal authority and
capacity and direction from its principal to enter into this
Agreement; that all resolutions or other actions have been taken
so as to enable it to enter into this Agreement.
f. Governing Law/Venue
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in
accordance with the laws of the state of California. Any action
arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought only
in the federal or state courts located in San Diego County, State
of California, and if applicable, the City of Chula Vista, or as
close thereto as possible. Venue for this Agreement, and
performance hereunder, shall be the City of Chula vista.
[end of page. next page is signature page.]
9
/!1/;2;;
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item J /
SUBMITTED BY:
Meeting Date 1/4/94
Resolution / 7 .5 L/~ approving a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) by and between the cities of
Chula Vista, La Mesa, Poway, National City, and
Imperial Beach for purposes of a coordinated
approach to regulating cable television rates
and appropriating funds ther~r
Deputy City Manager Thomson il
Director of Finance ~
t .17'
City Manager ;r& /c1 v (4/5THS Vote: Yes~No___)
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
In October 1992 Congress passed the "Cable Television Consumer
Protection and Competition Act of 1992" (Cable Act of 1992).
Subsequently the Federal Communications commission (FCC) issued
rules establishing the right of local franchising authorities to
regulate basic service rates. The purpose of the proposed MOU is
to provide a vehicle by which several local cities can coordinate
their cable television regulation efforts.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution approving the
MOU among the several cities and appropriating $7,500.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
At its meeting on September 7, 1993, the City Council adopted
Resolution No. 17245 authorizing the City to submit a certification
application to the FCC for regulation of cable television basic
service rates. The application was submitted and the City was
effectively certified to regulate basic service rates of Cox Cable
San Diego as of November 12, 1993. It was previously determined
that Chula vista Cable was not subject to rate regulation.
Several other local cities also served by Cox Cable San Diego have
gone through the same certification process as Chula Vista. Several
months ago an informal cable television committee was formed with
representatives from the cities of Chula vista, La Mesa, Poway,
National City, and Imperial Beach in order to explore opportunities
for coordinating cable television regulation efforts. One of the
priorities identified by the committee was a need to have someone
with cable television expertise review the rate schedules submitted
by Cox Cable to determine if they are in conformance with the FCC
rules and guidelines, which are quite lengthy and complex.
/J~I
Page 2, Item II
Meeting Date tll..{./q4
The committee developed a Request for Proposal (RFP) to provide
services relating to the 1992 Cable Act. Services requested were
a general review of FCC Form 393 (a form showing Cox Cable's
calculation of its basic rate schedule) and supporting worksheets
to determine they are in conformance with the FCC formula for
calculating permitted rates, a comparison of Cox Cable's pricing
levels against FCC benchmark rules, a verification of the numbers
and amounts on FCC Form 393 and worksheets to Cox Cable's financial
records, and an analysis of the cost allocation method used by Cox
Cable.
The RFP was sent to sixteen firms and seven responses were
received. The committee decided to interview three firms, after
which it was unanimously recommended to select Public Knowledge,
Incorporated, to provide the requested services. The contract, for
a not to exceed amount of $7,500, is within the authority (less
than $25,000) of the City Manager to enter into, if the
appropriation is approved by the City Council.
MOU
In order to administer the contract with Public Knowledge Inc. (the
"consul tant"), the several cities are proposing to enter into a MOU
which will provide a framework for the relationship among the
cities and designate Chula vista as the administering agency for
this contract. As Administrator, Chula vista will negotiate the
contract with Public Knowledge, submit it to the other cities for
approval, and make payments to the consultant.
The cost of the consultant services is to be shared equally among
the five cities. The total estimated cost of the contract is
$7,500 which results in a $1,500 share for each city. Chula vista
will make payments to the consultant and be reimbursed by each city
for its share of the cost.
The MOU is being submitted for approval to each city's Council on
January 4 or 11, 1994. To the extent reasonably possible, the MOU
is intended to serve as a vehicle for future cooperation among the
cities in addressing mutual interests regarding cable television
related issues.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Attachment One
Attachment Two
Attachment Three -
Staff is seeking an appropriation from the General Fund of $7,500
of which $6,000 will be reimbursed from other cities. Net cost to
Chula vista is $1,500.
. ~'~
Memorandum of Understandlng . p
council, Agenda Statement of September 7'J~iJ
Resolutlon No. 17245 N dJ1.
OT SCANNED 14.
/ /.-~
RESOLUTION NO.
/ 'l3t/rT
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING A MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING (MOU) BY AND BETWEEN THE CITIES
OF CHULA VISTA, LA MESA, POWAY, NATIONAL CITY,
AND IMPERIAL BEACH FOR PURPOSES OF A
COORDINATED APPROACH TO REGULATING CABLE
TELEVISION, RATES AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS
THEREFOR
WHEREAS, in October 1992, Congress passed the "Cable
Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992"; and
WHEREAS, subsequently the Federal Communications
commission issued rules establishing the right of local franchising
authorities to regulate basic service rates; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of the proposed Memorandum of
Understanding is to provide a vehicle by which several local cities
can coordinate their cable television regulation efforts; and
WHEREAS, the City Manager has selected a proposed
contract service provider in accordance wi th the Chula vista
Municipal Code and with the assistance and participation of the
cooperating cities, and has negotiated a contract for $7,500 to be
entered into by the ci ty and Public Knowledge, Inc. if the
appropriation provided herein is approved by Council.
NOW, THERE~ORE, BElT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the ci ty of Chula Vista does hereby approve a Memorandum of
Understanding by and between the cities of Chula Vista, La Mesa,
Poway, National City, and Imperial Beach for purposes of a
coordinated approach to regulating cable television rates, a copy
of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk as Document No.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the sum of $7,500 is hereby
appropriated from the unappropriated balance of the General Fund to
Account 100-0210-5202.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Lyman Christopher, Director of
Finance
~ ~~y(
Bruce M. Booga d City
Attorney
F:\home\attorney\cable.mou
JJ-J) //-1'
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BY AND BETWEEN
THE CITIES OF LA MESA, CHULA VISTA, POWAY, NATIONAL CITY, AND
IMPERIAL BEACH FOR THE PURPOSES OF ACQUIRING AND FUNDING CABLE
TELEVISION RATE REGULATION CONSULTING SERVICES WITH REGARD
TO COX CABLE SAN DIEGO, INC.
This MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ("Agreement") is entered
into effective as of January 14 , 1994 by and between the City of
La Mesa, the City of Chula Vista, the City of Poway, the City of
National City and the City of Imperial Beach, (each a "City" and
collectively, the "Cities"), with reference to the following facts:
WHEREAS, the Cable Television Consumer Protection and
Competition Act of 1992 ("Cable Act") provides the opportunity for
cities to requlate basic cable television rates as prescribed in
requlations designed by the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC);
WHEREAS, the cities have been working together to develop
an approach to requlating cable television rates wi thin their
jurisdictions in an efficient and cost effective manner;
WHEREAS, the cities have determined that working
cooperatively on the hiring of a consultant for the purpose of
reviewing the financial and technical information regarding cable
television rates charged by Cox Cable San Diego, Inc., the cable
television service provider in the Cities, is the most efficient
and effective means to perform the duties of the rate requlation
authority for the Cities; and
WHEREAS, the cities have solicited requests for proposals
for cable television rate requlation consulting services, and
received seven complete responses, from which three firms were
interviewed and one recommended for selection.
NOW, THEREFORE, the cities hereby agree as follows:
1. Hiring of Consultant. The Cities agree to hire the firm
of Public Knowledge, Inc. (the "Consultant") to perform certain
cable rate requlation consulting services to be more particularly
described in the consulting services contract ("Contract) between
the City of Chula Vista and Consultant.
2. Administerina Agency. The City of Chula Vista shall act
on behalf of the Cities as the administering agency (the
"Administrator") for the Contract. The duties of the Administrator
shall include (a) negotiating and preparing the contract, (b)
distributing copies of the negotiated Contract to the Cities for
their approval, (c) ~rocessing Contract payment requests made by
the Consultant. The Administrator's duties shall n2t include (i)
1
/! 1f7-1C H lTH3 NT ON f?
//'3
gathering and providing Consultant with information necessary for
Consultant to analyze the respective cities cable rates, or (ii)
resolving any disputes that may arise between the Consultant and
one or more of the Cities, or (iii) processing or preparing any
Cable Act reporting or compliance documents on behalf of the
Cities, all of which such duties shall be the obligations of each
City, respectively.
3. Sharina of Costs. The cities shall share equally the cost
of the consulting services provided by the Consultant under the
Contract. For example, if the Contract cost is $6,200, each City
shall be responsible for $1,240 of such costs. The Administrator
will bill each of the cities for its share of the consulting
service costs under. the Contract as paYment requests from the
Consultant are received. The Cities agree to make the required
paYments to the Administrator within fifteen (1S) days after the
receipt of such bill. The administrator shall not be obligated to
advance monies owed by each of the cities under the Contract on
behalf thereof, although the Administrator may elect to do so in
its sole discretion in the event that a City fails to pay the
amount billed in the above-described 1S-day period and fails to
notify the Administrator in writing of any reason for Administrator
not to advance such amount. Each city acknowledges that failure to
make timely paYment under the above-described 1S-day period may
delay the report to be issued by Consultant with respect to that
City.
4. Future Aareements. The parties acknowledge that, to the
extent reasonably possible, this Agreement is intended to serve as
a framework for future agreements between the cities with respect
to other cable related consulting services and issues, including,
without limitation, further evaluations of the Cable Act,
applicable FCC rules and procedures and other cable rate structure
and increase issues. The parties agree to meet and confer in the
future as such issues arise in order to discuss the benefits of
entering into cooperative arrangements in order to address such
issues.
S. Termination Riahts. Each city shall have the right to
withdraw from this Agreement by giving thirty (30) days written
notice to the other ci ties of such wi thdrawal and upon full
satisfaction of all such City's obligations under the Contract and
this agreement. In the event that any such withdrawal leaves only
two remaining cities as parties to this agreement, this agreement
shall automatically terminate unless such remaining cities mutually
agree to continue the effectiveness hereof.
6. Additional Limits on Administrator's Responsibilities and
Liabilitv. The parties acknowledge that the Administrator shall
not be responsible for monitoring or assuring the accuracy and
completeness of the Consul tant' s work under the Contract with
respect to any of the cities. Accordingly, each City agrees to
2
;/-t
hold harmless and waive any claim against the Administrator in
connection with any work by the Consultant under the Contract. In
the event that any City disputes amounts owed or the quality of
work performed by Consultant under the Contract, such dispute shall
be resolved between that City and the Consultant. Furthermore, in
the event of such a dispute, no City may withhold paYment to the
Administrator where the Administrator has already properly advanced
paYment to the Consultant in accordance with paragraph number three
herein.
7. Further Assurances. The parties agree to perform such
further acts and to execute and deliver such additional documents
and instruments as may be reasonably required in order to carry out
the provisions of this Agreement and the intentions of the parties.
8. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple
copies, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which
shall constitute one Agreement after each party has signed such a
counterpart.
9. Entire Aareement. This Agreement together wi th all
exhibits attached hereto and other Agreements expressly referred to
herein constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties with
respect to the subject matter contained herein. All prior or
contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations,
warranties and statements, oral or written, are superseded.
10. Attornev's Fees. If any party commences legal action for
any relief against any other party arising out of this Agreement,
- the losing party shall pay the prevailing party's legal costs and
expenses including, but not limited to, reasonable attorney's fees.
11. city Representatives/Notice. Notice to any parties
hereunder shall be in writing either personally delivered or sent
by certified mail or by facsimile copy to the city representative
and at the address specified hereinbelow.
~
Desianated ReDresentative/Address/PAX
La Mesa
Sandra Schultz
Deputy City Manager
4975 Memorial Drive
La Mesa, CA 91941
FAX 464-3761
poway
Patrick Foley
principal Management Analyst
13325 Civic Center Drive
Poway, CA 92064-0120
FAX 679-4369
3
I/~ 7
National City
Gerry Bolint
Assistant City Manager
1243 National City Boulevard
National City, CA 92050-4397
FAX 336-4376
Chula vista
Jim Thomson
Deputy City Manager
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
FAX 585-5612
Imperial Beach
Dennis Trigg
Management Analyst
825 Imperial Beach Boulevard
Imperial Beach, CA 91932
FAX 429-9770
12. Arbitration. The parties agree to arbitrate any dispute
arising with respect to this Agreement through independent
arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American
Arbitration Association.
4
I/~~
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereby enter into this
Agreement effective as of the date first set forth above.
Mayor
City of La Mesa
Mayor
city of Chula Vista
Approved as to form
La Mesa
Approved as to form
Chula vista
Mayor
City of poway
Mayor
City of National City
Approved as to form
poway
Approved as to form
National City
Mayor city of Imperial Beach
Approved as to form .
Imperial Beach
c:\Ic\cabk.IDCIU
5
11--7
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
Meeting Date
9/7/93
:ITEM TITLE: Resolution 17.245 Authorizing the submission of
a certification application to the Federal
Communications Commission, adopting regulations
that are consistent with the Federal Communications
commission's cable television basic service rate
rules and regulations; and establishing certain
procedural laws and regulations which provide a
reasonable opportunity for consideration of the
views of interested parties in cable television rate
regulation proceedings taken hereunder
SUBMITTED BY: Deputy City Manager Thomson
Director of Finance oft!
REVIEWED BY: City Manager (4/5THS Vote: Yes-==No-!-)
In October 1992 Congress passed the "Cable Television Consumer
Protection and Competition Act of 1992" (Cable Act of 1992). On
May 3, 1993, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued an
Order relating to rate regulation for cable television services.
The effective date of the Order was originally June 21, 1993, but
was delayed to September 1, 1993. The Rate Order, although lengthy
(over 500 pages) and highly complicated, clearly establishes the
right of the local franchising authorities to regulate basic
service rates. Basic service rates must include, at a minimum, all
broadcast channels and PEG (public, education, and governmental)
channels. Additionally, the Rate Order provides for federal
regulation of all elevated services except pay services (which are
unregulated) . In order for a jurisdiction to exercise its
statutory ability to regulate basic service rates, it must file for
certification. Council action tonight will authorize the City to
submit a certification application to the FCC for regulation of
basic service rates.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution authorizing the
City to submit a certification application to the FCC for
regulation of basic service rates and establishing procedures
required by the FCC.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The Cable Act of 1992 addresses many areas relating to the
provision of cable television services including rate regulation,
customer service standards, franchise renewals, and signal quality
standards. The new law is intended to return to cable television
//--/tJ
4rr/lC/f41E/VT fCUd
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 9/7/93
franchising authorities a limited ability to regulate rates.
However, the new law does not automatically restore rate regulation
to local authorities. Franchising authorities may activate local
regulation of basic cable service rates by requesting FCC
certification.
An application, for which the FCC has developed the attached form,
requires that the City certify the following:
1. The City's regulations are, or within 120 days of
certification will be, consistent with the rate
regulations adopted by the FCC for the basic service
tier.
2. The City has the legal authority to adopt, and the
personnel to administer, such regulations.
3. The City's procedural rules provide, or within 120 days
of certification will provide, an opportunity for
consideration of the views of interested parties.
4. The City has no reason to dispute the statutory
presumption that cable operators located within our
City limits are not subject to effective competition.
The attached resolution certifies the above items and provides for
initial rate procedures and regulations as required.
The City may file the FCC Form 328 on or after September 1, 1993,
the effective date of the Rate Order. A copy of the certification
form must also be served on all cable operators (Cox Cable and
Chula Vista Cable) in the City on or before the date the form is
filed at the commission.
The certification will be automatically effective 30 days after the
filing unless the FCC affirmatively rejects the filing within the
30-day period as insufficient.
Once certified for regulation, the City must notify the cable
operators that all statutory requirements are in compliance and
that the City intends to regulate basic service rates. The cable
operator then has 30 days from receipt of such notification to
either (a) file its basic rate schedule with the City, using FCC
forms, or (b) file a petition for reconsideration of the
certification.
Once the City receives the schedule of rates for basic service tier
from the cable operator, the City makes a determination as to
whether the rates are in compliance with the FCC's standards. In
the event of a finding of non-compliance, the FCC allows the City
to order rate reductions and refunds. Such actions would be
I/~J/
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 9/7/93
subject to an appeals process involving the FCC.
Limited Authoritv to Requlate Rates
As previously mentioned, the City will only have the ability to
regulate basic service (all broadcast channels and PEG channels)
rates.
This level of regulation severely limits the impact that the City
will have on overall cable television service rates. The reason
for this is that the majority of cable subscribers are served above
the basic cable rate level and only a minority of subscribers
receive the minimum level of service. staff believes that it is
important for the City to regulate rates at whatever level is
legitimately allowed by law, even if that regulation is limited.
This point is highlighted because it appears that many citizens
have the mistaken belief that the City will be able to control or
regulate all cable television rates.
Under the Cable Act of 1992, the FCC will regulate rates for
expanded tiers, now designated as "Cable Programming Services,"
which include channels such as CNN, ESPN, and MTV. (Pay-per-view
channels such as Cinemax or HBO are not regulated).
Customer Service Standards
The FCC adopted in April, 1993 a Final Report and Order
implementing the customer service provisions of the Cable Act of
1992. The standards established by the FCC and the Order were
effective on July 1 provided, however, that franchising authorities
cannot adopt and enforce the standards until 90 days written notice
is provided to cable operators of the city's intention to adopt and
enforce the standards established in the Order.
The FCC considers its standards to be minimum requirements, and
does not prevent local authorities from adopting stricter standards
or continuing to enforce such standards which already may be in
place. Staff is reviewing the existing Franchise Agreements
against the FCC standards to determine if any adjustments need to
be made to the existing customer service requirements.
Resources Needed for Rate Requlation and Potential Cost-Sharinq
The Cable Act of 1992 indicates that the staff time or other costs
that a franchise authority may incur in regulating basic service
rates should be covered by the franchise fees received. In order
to conduct an adequate review of the cable rates in a timely
//-/2
Page 4, Item
Meeting Date 9/7/93
manner, the City may want to contract for some specialized legal
and auditing work.
Some other local cities are considering obtaining such contractual
assistance or sharing in-house resources the larger agencies may
have. Staff has held some very preliminary meetings' with several
other cities and the County of San Diego to explore opportunities
that may exist for coordination of cable television regulation
efforts. This could potentially take the form of a joint powers
authority, a common commission, joint contracting with outside
consultant(s), or simply informal networking to obtain some
efficiencies and perhaps consistency in terms of administering the
Cable Act of 1992, reviewing rate information, certifying to
regulate rates, and implementing customer service standards. Staff
will return to Council at a later date to report on any progress
made in relation to these efforts. Chula Vista staff are focusing
at this point more on joint contracting and information sharing
with other agencies, not on a regional commission or joint powers
authority.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Staff time and costs are expended in working on cable television
related issues but there are no direct costs to submit a
certification application to the FCC for authority to regulate
basic cable rates.
In the near future the City may desire to engage specialized legal
or consultant services in order to review and/or audit rate
schedules submitted by the cable companies or to perform other work
in relation to the Cable Act of 1992. At the appropriate time
staff may return with a proposed appropriation of funds.
Attachment:
Form FCC 328 - Franchising Authority certification
//-/3
...... ( '1111 .! C
............ D, C. JOS54
I J
~",o:a
· '..0.0550
IIpInI.SI311H
I
4
FCC 328 I For FCC Ute Only
CERTIFICATION OF FRANCHISING AUTHORITY TO REGULATE BASIC CABLE SERVICE RATES
AND INITIAL FINDING OF LACK OF EFFECTIVE COMPETITION
NMM of FranchilinS Authority
Malina Addreu
CIty I State I ZIP Code
T.Iephone No. (Include .... code):
'enon to contact with respect to this form:
1
2. a. Name (I) _ addr-<-) of QbIe 1yItem(s)"" auoc:iated FCC community
it !dent Ii with isd ch add ionaI If necessaryJ
un lien In yOUr jur ictlon. (Atta it' IIheetJ
c.bIe System'. Name
.
Malina Adchu
CIty ISUte I ZI' Code
c.bIe System'. FCC Community Unit identifier:
c.bIe System'. Name
-
Malina Addreu
CIty ISUte I ZIP Code
c.bIe System'. FCC Community Unit ~
2. b. NMM (I) of 1yItem(a) and auoc:iated community ...it 1dentifierU) you
claim .. aubject to resulation .... with reaped to which you .. filin& thia
certifation. (Attach additional aheets If necessaryJ
1_01_ I =:r- I
1_01_ I ~..- I
2. Co Have you __ a copy of thia form on .. putieI Dves DNo
..... In 2.b"
J. Will your fnncbiainS ..ttaority Mop!
(within 120 days of cert!ficatlon) and
.....inlater NpIatIona with respect to
baaIc QbIe .mce that .. conaIstent
with the replatlons Mop!ed by the FCC
pursuant to 47 U.s.c. SectIon 543(b)l
4. With reaped to the franc:hiain& authorIty'. replatlons referred
to In QuestIon 3, Dyes ONO
DYes ONO
L Doea your franchiain& authority have
the IepI authority to Mop! them,
b. Doea your franchialn& authority have DYes ONO
the penonaeI to .....lniater them,
5. Do the procedural .... .... repIationa
-..pIicabIe to rate repIation proceedinp
by your franc:hiain& authority provide a
........ opportunity for conaIdendion
of the views of intereated pries'
Dyes ONO
Dyes ONO
6. The Commilllon preAIIMI that the QbIe
1yItem(s) liated In 2.b. .. (are) not aubject
to effec:tM competition. Iaaed on the
definition below, do you have ...... to
believe that this preaumptIon .. correct'
(Effec:tM competition ....... that (a) fewer than 30 percent of the
households In the franchiae area aubacrIbe to the cable aervice of a
able 1yItem; (b) the franc:hiae ... .. (i) eerved by III lead two
unaffiliated IIIUItIchanneI video provammln& diatrbltOl"l each of
which offera comparable video propammlna to IIlIe1st 50 percent
of the houaehoIds In the franchiae IrU; and (ii) the number of
houaehoIcIa aubacrlbm, to prosrammin& .me. offered by
IIIUItIchanneI video prosrammin& clistributOl"l other than the Iarpat
MUltIchannel video prosrammln& diatrlbutor exceeds 15 percent of
the houaehoIds In the franchiae area; or (c) . multichannel video
prosrammln& diatrlbutor oper'" by the franchlslna authority for
that franchiae... off.-. video propllllll\inI to IIlIeaat 50 percent
of the households In that fnncbiae ...,
5ipature
Tide
DIlle
WILLFUL FAlSE STATEMENTS MADE ON THIS FORM ARE
'UNISHABLE IV FINE AND/OR IMPRISONMENT (U.5. CODE
nTLE ", SECTION 1001). .
Return the q.... and one copy of thil certif'1CIIl1on form C.
Indicated In 1nstructIona),"ons with any attachmenb, to:
Federal eommunk:atlons eommlsaion
Attn: c.bIe Frandaisin& AuthorIty c.tificaIion
..0.10.11539
WashlnJton, D. C. 20036 / 1- / 'i
,
I'CC 121
... ,",
RESOLUTION NO. 17245
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA AUTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION OF A CERTIFICATION
APPLICATION TO THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION,
ADOPTING REGULATIONS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION I S CABLE TELEVISION
BASIC SERVICE RATE RULES AND REGULATIONS; AND
ESTABLISHING CERTAIN PROCEDURAL LAWS AND REGULATIONS
WHICH PROVIDE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY FOR CONSIDERATION
OF THE VIEW OF INTERESTED PARTIES IN CABLE TELEVISION
RATE REGULATION PROCEEDINGS TAKEN HEREUNDER
WHEREAS, the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of
1992 (the "1992 Cable Act") provides, in relevant part, that franchising
authorities can regulate the rates for Basic Cable Service, as defined in the
1992 Cable Act, in accordance with Basic Service Rate regulations prescribed by
the Federal Communications Commission (the .Commission") upon certification by
the Commission; and,
WHEREAS, the Commission has adopted final rules and regulations
implementing Section 623 of the 1992 Cable Act in the Report and Order and
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, MM Docket 92-2266, Released May 3, 1993,
effective June 21 and September 1, 1993; and,
WHEREAS, a franchising authority seeking jurisdiction to regulate Basic
Service Rates, as defined in the 1992 Cable Act, must obtain authorization from
the Commission to so regulate; and,
WHEREAS, to receive such approval, the franchising authority must file a
written certification with the Commission certifying that:
1. The franchi sing authori ty will adopt and admi ni ster regul ati ons wi th
respect to the rates subject to regulation under Section 623 of the 1992
Cab 1 e Act that are cons i stent wi th the regu 1 at ions prescri bed by the
Commission thereunder; and,
2. The franchising authority has the legal authority to adopt, and the
personnel to administer, such regulations; and,
3. Procedural laws and regulations applicable to rate regulation proceedings
have been adopted, or will be adopted, by such franchising authorities
which provide a reasonable opportunity for consideration of the views of
interested parties; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista, as the governing body, hereby desires
to authori ze the Ci ty Manager, or hi s designee, to fi 1 e on its behalf all
necessary forms, documents, and otherwise with the Commission which are necessary
and proper to allow it to regulate Basic Service Rates, as defined in the 1992
Cable Act; and,
//-J~
1f-tT71C H m e-/V-r- t/+ rzeif
Resolution No. 17245
Page 2
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista now desires to adopt regulations with
respect to the regulation of Basic Service Rates which are consistent with the
regulations prescribed by the Conunission and to adopt procedural laws and
regulations applicable to rate regulation proceedings which provide a reasonable
opportunity for consideration of the views of interested parties; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby resolve as follows:
SECTION 1.
Under the laws of the United States, the Constitution and
Statutes of the State of Ca 1 Horni a, and the ordi nances,
agreements, and procedures of the City of Chula Vista, the
City of Chula Vista possesses the legal authority to adopt the
regulations contained herein.
SECTION 4.
The City of Chul a Vi sta possesses suffi ci ent personnel to
administer the regulations adopted herein.
The City of Chula Vista has no actual knowledge that the cable
system, or cable systems, operating in its jurisdiction are
subject to Effective Competition and thus, based upon the
presumption of established in Section 76.609 of the Code of
Federal Regulations, ("CFR"), the cable operator, or cable
operators, operating within its jurisdiction are not subject
to Effective Competition.
The City Manager, or his designee, is hereby authorized,
empowered, and instructed to file necessary and proper forms,
certifications, documents, and otherwise as prescribed in CFR
~76.610 Commission by (1) registered mail, return receipt
requested; or (2) hand delivery to the Commission and a date
stamp copy obtained. A copy of the certification form
described herein shall be served on the cable operator, or
cable operators, on or before the date said certification form
is filed with the Commission.
SECTION 2.
SECTION 3.
SECTION 6.
Upon certification by the Commission, the City Manager shall
give, by registered mail, return receipt requested or hand
de 1 i very, written noti fi cati on to the cable operator, or cable
operators, that the City of Chula Vista has been so certified
to so regulate Basic Service Rates and the cable operator, or
cable operators, shall thereby be directed pursuant to CFR
~76.930 to file a schedule of rates for the Basic Service Tier
and associated equipment with the City of Chula Vista within
thirty (30) days as provided in CFR i76.930.
Upon receipt of the schedule or rates for the Basic Service
Tier and associated equipment as provided in Section 5 above
from the cable operator, or cable operators, such schedule of
rates and charges shall be referred to staff for review and
evaluation pursuant to the substantive and procedural
standards set forth in CFR ~~76-900-76.985 and the Report and
SECTION 5.
II--I?
SECTION 7.
SECTION 8.
SECTION 9.
Resolution No. 17245
Page 3
Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in MM Docket
92-266.
After a cable operator, or cable operators, have submitted for
review its existing rates for the Basic Service Tier and
associated equipment costs, or proposed changes in these rates
(i nc 1 udi ng increases in the base 1 i ne channel charge that
results from reductions in the number of channels in a tier),
the existing rates will remain in effect or the proposed rates
will become effective after thirty (30) days from the date of
submission; provided, however, that the City may hold this
thirty (30) day deadline for an additional time by issuing a
brief written order as provided in CFR ~76.933(b) within
thirty (30) days of the date of submission explaining that it
needs additional time to review the rates.
If the City of.Chula Vista is unable to determine, based upon
the material submitted by the cable operator, that the
existing or proposed rate are within the Commission1s
permitted basic service tier charge or actual cost-of-
equipment as defined in CFR ~~76.922 and 76.923, or if a cable
operator has submitted a cost of service showing pursuant to
~~76.937{c) and 76.924, seeking to justify a rate above the
Conuni ss i on I s Basic Servi ce Ti er charge as defi ned in CFR
~~76.922 and 76.923, the City of Chula Vista may toll the
thirty (30) day deadline in Section 7 above to request and/or
consider additional information or consider the comments from
interested parties as follows:
(a) For an additional ninety (90) days in cases not
involving cost-of-service showings; or
(b) For an additional one hundred fifty (150) days in cases
involving cost-of-service showings.
If the City of Chula Vista has availed itself of the
additional ninety (90) or one hundred fifty (ISO) days
permitted above, and has taken no action within these
additional time periods, then the proposed rates will go into
effect at the end of the ninety (90) or one hundred fifty
(150) day periods, or existing rates will remain in effect at
such times, subject to refunds if the City of Chula Vista
subsequently issues a written decision disapproving any
portion of such rates, provided, however, that in order to
order refunds, the City of Chula Vista shall issue a brief
written order to the cable operator, or cable operators, by
the end of the ninety (90) or one hundred fifty (l50) day
period permitted above directing the cable operator, or cable
operators, to keep an accurate account of all amounts received
by reason of the rate in issue and on whose behalf such
amounts were paid.
) /- ) 7
Resolution No. 17245
Page 4
SECTION 10.
SECTION 11.
SECTION 12.
SECTION 13.
SECTION 14.
Upon receipt of a submission by a cable operator, or cable
operators pursuant to Section 5 above, the City of Chula Vista
shall give public notice by way of publication of said
submission in a newspaper of general circulation in the
jurisdiction within fourteen (14) days of receipt by the City
of Chula Vista thereof. Said publication notice shall state,
in substance, that the City of Chula Vista is considering the
submission of the cable operator reproduced therein, the date
of submi ss i on by the cable operator, that said rates will
become effective within thirty (30) days from the date of
submission unless the City of Chula Vista extends the review
time pursuant to Section 8 above, and that interested parties
may file written comments with the City Clerk within seven (7)
days of publication.
If, and to the extent, that the City of Chula Vista extends
the review period pursuant to Section 8 above, it shall then
act upon the rate submission only at a public hearing which
has been duly advertised and noticed pursuant to the
requi rements of Government Code Secti on 6066. At sai d noti ced
public hearing, which may be continued from time to time, all
interested parties including, but not limited to, subscribers,
shall possess a reasonable opportunity to express their views
regarding the matters before the City Council.
The City of Chula Vista shall issue a written decision in a
rate-making proceeding whenever it disapproves an initial rate
for the Basic Service Tier or associated equipment, in whole
or in part, disapproves a request for a rate increase in whole
or in part, or approves a request for an increase in whole or
in part over the objections of interested parties. The City
of Chula Vista is not required to issue a written decision
that approves'an unopposed existing or proposed rate for the
basic service tier or associated equipment. Any written
decision required herein shall only be issued and released at
an open and public meeting of the City Council and the text
shall be made available for public distribution at the offices
of the City Clerk during normal business hours commencing the
next business day after adoption by the City Council.
These regulations may be amended, from time to time, by the
City Council with or without concurrence or consent of the
cable operator, or cable operators, affected thereby.
If, and to the extent, a cable operator, or cable operators,
submits a cost-of-service showing pursuant to CFR ~~76.937(c)
and 76.924 seeking to justify a rate above the Commission1s
Basic Service ner charge as defined in CFR n76.922 and
76.923, the City of Chula Vista shall, within ninety (90) days
of the date of submission, adopt rules, regulations, and
procedures consistent with the rules and regulations of the
Commission telating to the procedural and substantive criteria
/I-/~
. ..
.
Resolution No. 17245
Page 5
to be app 1 i ed by the Ci ty of Chula Vi sta to sai d cost-of-
service submission.
The City shall possess all remedies available to it under
federal, state and local law including, but not limited to,
those remedies provided in CFR ~~76.940-76.943.
SECTION 15.
Presented by
;t-f'l?VL-"1 c;h~Y~A-
Lyman Christopher .
Director of Finance
//-11
by
()
~
.. .
Resolution No. 17245
Page 6
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista, California, this 7th day of September, 1993, by the following vote:
YES: Councilmembers: Fox, Horton, Moore, Rindone, Nader
NOES: Councilmembers: None
ABSENT: Councilmembers: None
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: None
~/~ ;.7
c...'-- , !.4/..::?-:
Tim Nader; Mayor
ATTEST:
, \ '~ \'\: ,
'\ \ ,'., \ \
", ',:" ",', " '\ ~... \ t. ','
Vicki C. Soderquist, Deputy City Clerk
\,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO) SSe
CITY OF CHULA VISTA )
I, Vicki C. Soderquist, Deputy City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California,
do hereby certify that the foregoi ng Reso 1 ut i on No. 17245 was duly passed,
approved, and adopted by the City Council held on the 7th day of September, 1993.
Executed this 7th day of September, 1993.
'0., \\ C'" .
\~ \J ~ ~ ~ ~:,';J \\ G' \ ~
Vicki C. Soderquist, ~ty City Clerk
1/- ;2.tJ
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM / J<
MEETING DATE 1/4/1994
ITEM TITLE: Resolution /7.:37'1 accepting California State Library
matching funds awarded to the Chula Vista Literacy
Team, appropriating funds, and amending FY 1993-94
budget to include .25 FTE positions.
SUBMITTED BY: Library Directo:~ 1f
REVIEWED BY: City Manager dO 1- fJ (4/5ths Vote: YES l NO_)
In 1987 the library received a five-year California State Library grant to
establish the Chula Vista Literacy Team. The fifth and final year of this
funding was FY '91-92. The California State Library has announced another
one-year extension of California Library Services Act funding for programs
which were awarded the original five-year grants. The FY '93-94 awards are
based on a match of $1 for every $4.51 spent and raised locally during FY '93-
94. This will provide $25,838 to the Chula Vista Literacy Team.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution accepting the
grant, appropriating the funds, and amending the FY 1993-94 budget to
include .25 FTE positions.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: On January 21, 1987 the
Library Board of Trustees voted to support the Library's application for the
original 5-year CLSA California Literacy Campaign grant.
DISCUSSION:
As an extension of the original CLSA literacy grant, these funds are intended
to supplement monies raised locally to support library adult literacy
programs. The $25,838 awarded must be spent in FY '93-94. Some of the funds
will be encumbered to cover the rent and utilities on the existing Literacy
Team office and Annex for the six month period July I, 1994 - December 30
1994, thereby offsetting general fund costs next year. The Chula Vista Literacy
Team also intends to use the funds to increase the hours of the Temporary
Expert Professional hired through the 1993-94 Federal Title VI grant to
provide more in depth support to tuors and learners using our new
instructional program for dyslexic learners. This grant will allow us to add .18
FTE for the remainder of this fiscal year to that part-time position. The
Literacy Team will also use matching funds to purchase instructional
resources, small equipment including an overhead projector and a video
recorder, and promotional items to recognize volunteer tutors. Finally, funds
will be used to catalog the literacy resource collection, requiring a .07 FTE
clerical aid. This plan has been approved by the California State Library.
/2-)
/;2. ~ c:<
FISCAL IMP ACT: Accepting this grant will provide $25,838 in FY '93-94 to
the Chula Vista Literacy Team. These funds cannot supplant existing funds,
however, general fund expenditure for the literacy. office rent and utilities
will be reduced in FY '94-95 by $5,640. (For Matching Fund Budget, see
Attachment A).
/;;. "e2.
RESOLUTION NO.
/7 .J L/-r;
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING CALIFORNIA STATE LIBRARY
MATCHING FUNDS AWARDED TO THE CHULA VISTA
LITERACY TEAM, APPROPRIATING FUNDS, AND
AMENDING FY 1993-94 BUDGET TO INCLUDE .25 FTE
POSITIONS
WHEREAS, in 1987, the Library received
California State Library grant to establish the
Literacy Team; and
a five-year
Chula Vista
WHEREAS, the fifth and final year of this funding was FY
1991-92; and
WHEREAS, the California State Library has announced
another one-year extension of California Library Services Act
funding for programs which were awarded the original five-year
grants; and
WHEREAS, the FY 1993-94 awards are based on a match of $1
for every $4.51 raised locally and spend during FY 1993-94 which
will provide $25,838 to the Chula vista Literacy Team; and
WHEREAS, the State Library staff has informally approved
that some of the funds will be encumbered to cover the rent and
utilities on the existing Literacy Team office and Annex for the
six month period July 1, 1994- December 30, 1994, thereby
offsetting general fund costs next year; and
WHEREAS, in addition, funds will also be used to increase
the hours of the Temporary Expert Professional hired through the
1993-94 Federal Title VI grant to provide more in depth support to
tutors and learners using the Library'S instructional program for
dyslexic learners and to purchase additional resources.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby accept the $25,838 California
State Library Matching Funds awarded to the Chula Vista Literacy
Team.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the FY 1993-94 budget is
amended to include .25 FTE positions with a .18 Temporary Expert
Professional and a .07 FTE clerical aid position.
BE IT
appropriated to
attached hereto
forth in full.
FURTHER RESOLVED that $25,838 is hereby
Account 216-2165 as set forth in Attachment A,
and incorporated herein by reference as if set
Presented by
Approved as to form by
David Palmer, Library Director Br
F:\bome\attomey\CLSA
);2, :J
ATTACHMENT A
CLSA MATCHING FUNDS BUDGET
FY 1993-94
December, 1993
BUDGET ACCOUNT: 216-2165
5105 Hourly Wages $10,490.
5143 Medicare $153.
5145 PARS $395.
5298 Other Contractual $800.
5321 Instructional Resources $3,000.
5323 Rent, Utility $7,740.
5324 Equipment $2,160.
5398 Other Commodities $1,100.
TOTAL: $25,838.
;;<-1
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 1.3
Meeting Date 01104/94
SUBMITTED BY:
Resolution ) 7J~Amending Resolution 16756 to Add Appropriation of
Funds for the Second Amendment to the Agreement with Wallace, Roberts and
Todd for Preparation of Resource Enhancement Plan for the Otay River Valley
Director of Parks and RecreationctJ
City Manager 1(.1~~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes X No ~
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND: At the August 25, 1992 City Council meeting, the Council approved Resolution
16756 Approving the second amendment to the agreement with Wallace, Roberts and Todd, Inc. for
expanded scope of work, and authorizing acceptance of an agreement with the State Coastal Conservancy
for an augmentation of $8,000 to an existing $80,000 Coastal Conservancy Grant top prepare a Resource
Enhancement Plan for the Otay River Valley. The Council item included the resolution to augment the
grant by $8,000; however, the resolution did not contain appropriating action due to staff oversight. In
order for the City to receive the grant funds on a reimbursement basis, the $8,000 must be appropriated
to PR-148 - Otay River Valley - State Grant. An amended Resolution 16756 has been prepared which
provides language for appropriating funds to the grant augmentation. This is a technical correction to
provide for carrying out the City's clear intention.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Council approve Amended Resolution 16756 to incorporate
appropriating funds therefor.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable.
DISCUSSION: On June 24, 1991, the City entered into an agreement with the California Coastal
Conservancy to augment an existing grant of $80,000, by $8,000, to make a total grant amount of
$88,000, in order for the City to prepare an Enhancement Plan for the Otay River Valley.
Resolution 16756 has been amended to include the City Council authorizing the appropriation of $8,000
to PR-148 - Otay River Valley - State Grant.
The August 25, 1992 staff report is attached (see Attachment "A").
FISCAL IMPACT: None. The City will be fully reimbursed by the California Coastal Conservancy
in the amount of $8,000 for work completed on the Otay River Valley Enhancement Plan.
Attachment: Council Report of August 25, 1992
[A-113 - wrt-2.A13]
13-/ /fJ-t.-
RESOLUTION NO.
J 7.352/
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING RESOLUTION 16756 TO ADD
APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS FOR THE SECOND
AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AND WALLACE, ROBERTS AND TODD,
INC. FOR PREPARATION OF A RESOURCE ENHANCEMENT
PLAN FOR THE OTAY RIVER VALLEY
WHEREAS, the City entered into an agreement with the
Consultant on August 21, 1990, to prepare a resource enhancement
plan of the Otay River Valley from Interstate 5 to one-half mile
east of Interstate 805, and entered into the first amendment to the
agreement with the Consultant on November 20, 1990, to expand the
scope-of-work with the consultant to extend the study area from
one-half mile east of Interstate 805 to the Western boundary of the
Otay Ranch; and,
WHEREAS, the City is desirous of obtaining additional
archaeological studies in the Otay River Valley and the Consultant
has the necessary expertise and familiarity with the area to
perform the additional work; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Chula vista received an $80,000
grant from the State Coastal Conservancy to hire a consultant to
prepare a resource enhancement plan, and this grant was
subsequently augmented by the Coastal Conservancy in the amount of
$8,000 to cover the additional archaeological work; and,
WHEREAS, on August 25, 1992 the City Council of the City
of Chula vista approved an agreement with Wallace, Roberts and
Todd, Inc., for the extended scope-of-work on the Resource
Enhancement Plan for the Otay River valley, known as document
number C090-263A, a copy of which is on file in the office of the
city Clerk, by its approval of Resolution No. 16756; and
WHEREAS, through oversight, the resolution did not
include language apropriating the grant funds to the contract.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
CIty of Chula vista that the amount of $8,000 is hereby
appropriated from the State Parks and Recreation Grant Fund (614)
to Account PR-148 - Otay River Valley State Grant, and Resolution
No. 16756 is hereby amended to so state.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Jess Valenzuela
Director of Parks & Recreation
F:\home\aUomey\16756.rev
fl(t"'-~ 4<,(
Bruce M. Booga a5
City Attorney
/J-J /Ij ~1
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 7
Meeting Date 08!25/92
ITEM TITLE:
Ib15~
Resolution approving the second amendment to the agreement with
Wallace, Roherts and Todd, Inc. for expanded scope of work, and authorizing
acceptance of an agreement with the State Coastal Conservancy for an
augmentation of $8,000 to an existing $80,000 Coastal Conservancy Grant to
prepare a Resource Enhancement Plan for the Otay River Valley
SUBMITTED BY:
- i
Director of Parks and Rec~,a;jm jv
Director of Planning /((/-(,
City Manager ~k};>G
,.II
~
(4/5ths Vote: Yes _ No X)
REVIEWED BY:
On February 28, 1989, the City Council authorized the submittal of a grant application for $50,000
to the California Coastal Conservancy for the hiring of a consultant to undertake Phase I of a special
study of all properties within the Otay River flood plain from the Bay to one-half mile east of I-80S.
Subsequent to this action, in May, 1990, the Grant was augmented by $30,000 to add Phase II for the
development of resource management and development alternatives and associated expenses. On
August 21, 1990, the Council acknowledged receipt of an additional $30,000 in grant money (for a
total of $80,(00), and approved an agreement with Wallace, Roberts and Todd, Inc. (WRT) to
provide the consultant services. On November 20, 1990, the Council approved the first amendment
to the agreement with WRT, to extend the study areas of the resource enhancement plan for the
Otay River Valley by one mile to the western boundary of Otay Ranch.
This resolution is required to approve the second amendment to the agreement with WRT, Inc., to
expand the scope of work; and authorize acceptance from the Coastal Conservancy, of $8,000 in grant
monies for expanded work on the study.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the Resolution:
1. Approving the second amendment to the Agreement with WRT, Inc., and authorizing
the Mayor to sign the amendment; and
2. Authorizing the acceptance of an amendment to the agreement with the State Coastal
Conservancy for an augmentation of $8,000 to the $80,000 Grant to prepare an
Enhancement Plan for the Otay River Valley.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: N/A
DISCUSSION: The original intent of the Resource Enhancement Plan, for a grant amount of
$50,000, was to:
1.
Undertake a comprehensive study of all the properties located In the floodplain
between San Diego Bay and one half mile east of I-80S;
(OlaygJ11I]
1
~
Y/.' / J-3
_ ....<._~_."..~._~,..".~__'.._-<<._._'~,_~H~.~~_...^'.,'.__.____.._......._""""___..______
Item 1
Meeting Date 0&(25/92
2. Identify in the Plan, development strategies to minimize impacts to natural resources,
target the most beneficial areas for habitat restoration and enhancement, and
recommend public recreation and access improvements that would be compatible with
development and habitat constraints; and
3. Study and describe disturbed or contaminated areas to determine their potential
impacts on critical resources and recreational opportunities.
In May 1990, the Coastal Conservancy authorized $30,000 in additional funds when the responses
from consultants to the City's RFP for the study, exceeded the original $50,000 grant allocation. In
November, 1990, the Council amended the agreement with WRT to include additional work to the
western boundary of the Otay Ranch and approved Redevelopment Agency funds in the amount of
$10,000 to cover this work.
In June 1991, the State of California Coastal Conservancy approved $8,000 in additional grant funds
to the City of Chula Vista for expanded work on the Resource Enhancement Plan. The Department
had made a verbal agreement with WRT, Inc., in May of 1991, to include this work in the project and
perform a field survey of all areas not previously surveyed for cultural resources. However, the City
Attorney's Office has advised the Department that a formal amendment must be made to the
agreement with WRT, Inc., in order to increase the purchase order amount, fulfill the requirements
of the grant from the Coastal Conservancy and accept the additional funds ($8,000) from the
Conservancy for the work.
The study project is currently underway and staff expects completion by late-I992.
WRT has signed the second amendment to the agreement and, as previously approved by the
Council, the Parks and Recreation Director has been authorized to sign the agreements with the
State Coastal Conservancy on behalf of the City.
FISCAL IMPACT: None; the City will receive the additional $8,000, on a reimbursement-for-
expenses basis, from the Coastal Conservancy, to cover the costs of the work under the consultant
contract. The total grant amount from the Coastal Conservancy will now be $88,000.
Attachments:
Second Amendment to Agreement with WRT
Copy of Agreement with Coastal Conservancy for additional $8,000
IOtaygml]
2
13'~
-.. .._~----_._-_.
RESOLUTION l~O.
1(, 75~
RESOLUTION OF TIlE CI1Y COUNCIL APPROVING TIlE
SECOND AMENDMENT TO TIlE AGREEMENT BElWEEN TIlE
CI1Y OF CHUlA VISfA AND WAUACE, ROBERTS AND
TODD, INe. FOR TIlE PROVISION OF CONSULTING
SERVICES FOR TIlE PREPARATION OF A RESOURCE
ENHANCEMENT PlAN FOR TIlE CYfA Y RIVER VAlLEY
AND AU1HORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF AN ADDmONAL
$8,000 IN GRANf MONEY FROM TIlE COASTAL CONSERVANCY
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, the City entered into an agreement with the Consultant on August 21, 1990, to
prepare a resource enhancement plan of the Olay River Valley from Interstate 5 to one-half mile
east of Interstate 805, and entered into the first amendment to the agreement with tbe Consultant
on November 20, 1990, to expand the scope of work with the consultant to extend the study area
from one-balf mile east of Interstate 805 to tbe Western boundary of the Otay Rancb; and
WHEREAS, the City is desirous of obtaining additional arcbaeological studies in tbe Otay
River Valley and the Consultant bas tbe necessary expertise and familiarity with the area to perform
tbe additional work.
WHEREAS, tbe City of Chula Vista received an $80,000 grant from the State Coastal
Conservancy to bire a consultant to prepare a resource enhancement plan, and this grant was
augmented by $8,000 to cover the additional archaeological work; and
WHEREAS, to complete the study and obtain the necessary archaeological information for
the project area, and for an additional $7,161.00, WRT is willing to expand its scope of work to
include a field survey of all areas not previously surveyed for cultural reasons.
NOW, TIiEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista
does hereby approve an agreement with Wallace, Roberts and Todd, Inc. for the extended scope of
work on the Resource Enhancement Plan for the Otay River Valley, a copy of which is on file in the
office of the City.
BE ITFURTIiER RESOLVED that the May of the City of Chula Vista be, and he is bereby
authorized and directed to execute said agreement for an on behalf of the City of Chula Vista.
as to fo
A
Presented by
Jess Valenzuela
Director of Parks and Recreation
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
(CICoIyF'Dl)
3
)3'?
AMENDMENT TO 1HE AGREEMENT BETWEEN 1HE CI1Y OF
CHULA VISTA AND WALlACE, ROBERTS AND TODD, INe.
FOR 1HE PROVISION OF CONSULTING SERVICES FOR 1HE
PREPARATION OF A RESOURCE ENHANCEMENT PlAN FOR 1HE
OTAYRIVER VALLEY
TInS SECOND AMENDMENT TO 1HE AGREEMENT, made and entered into this _th day of August
1992, by and between the City of Chula Vista, a municipal corporation, herein after referred to as "City," and
Wallace, Roberts and Todd, Inc., a California corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Consultant;"
WHEREAS, the City entered into an agreement with the Consultant on August 21, 1990, to prepare a
resource enhancement plan of the Otay River Valley from Interstate 5 to one-half mile east of Interstate 805, and
entered into the first amendment to the agreement with the Consultant on November 20, 1990, to expand the scope
of work with the consultant to extend the study area from one-half mile east of Interstate 805 to the Western
boundary of the Otay Ranch; and
\VHEREAS, the City is desirous of obtaining additional archaeological studies in the Otay River Valley and
the Consultant has the necessary expertise and familiarity with the area to perform the additional work.
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista received an $80,000 grant from the State Coastal Conservancy to hire
a consultant to prepare a resource enhancement plan, and this grant was augmented by $8,000 to cover the additional
archaeological work; and
NOW, THEREFORE, the agreement awarded on August 21, 1990, is hereby amended to include the
following additions:
1. The opening paragraph of the original agreement is amended to add the following, at the end of said
paragraph:
"uo to the Western boundary of the Otay Ranch, and perform a field survey of all areas not
previously surveyed for cultural resources."
2. Section 4 of the Standard Agreement is hereby amended to add the following:
Phase 1. Field survey all areas not previously surveyed for cultural resources. This task
would involve intensive reconnaissance of areas not previously surveyed. The survey will
consist of parallel transects spaced approximately 15 meters apart - $7,161.00.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this second Amendment to the Agreement to be
executed the day and year first hereinabove set forth.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
~~~~
I hereby approve the form and legality of the foregoing Second Amendment to the Agreement this _th day
of August 1992.
CITY ATTORNEY
fouinmtJ
4
/.J'~
!TAN!:>ARD AGREEMENT-
8nl. . NY. ""'1
'",ROVEO BY TrlE
ATT"RNEY GENERAL
88-060 3
CON'T1lAC1"O""I .,. A'n LT ' .....E II
~ --- ._--- -
o 8TAn A.ENCY
ODe". 01" _N. _lit.
D~
o
o
o
8TA'n OF.~NI'"
~lfIIlA""" --.......
THIS AGREEME!\'T, made and ent" ,'ed into this 24th day of . June , 19.2l,
in the State of California. b)' and between State of California., through its dul)' elected or appointed.
q\ ied and acting
'#
ftn.a OP OI""IC&JI AC11NCI lIO'l .,. A TI
Executive Officer
I A_NCY
State O:le.stal Q:nservancy
L._h!1 ..lIf~ II. f' ' ,
City of O1u1a Vista · t~...4h~. ull.~ ,I.. CTR'rll' ~
WITNESSETH: Thai the Contractor for and in eonsideration of the eovenants. conditions. agreements. andllipulations of the Stale
hereinafter expressed. d0e5 hereb)' agree to furnish to the State RTVices and materials, IS follows:
(WI lord IfI"Ilfcr 10" ....,etl hv c..ntdDr,....., 10 _ ,.~ c.'NCIOr. ..,., /", ,n/t1ffIIIIft<< ",~. - at*" ".,., ..4 .-afica.iDM, '1 en~'
~e State Coastal Conservancy ("the Conservancy") and the City of
Chula vista ("the grantee") agree to amend their existing
Agreement No. 88-060 as follows: .
SCOPE OF AGREEMENT
Lines three and four of paragraph one of this section are deleted
and replaced by the following:
"...City of Chula Vista ("the grantee") a sum not to
exceed eighty-eight thousand dollars ($88,000), subject
to the terms and condition of this Agreement."
(continued on the following page)
CONTINUED ON _ SHEETS, EACH IEARING NAME OF CONTRACTOR AND CONTRACT NUMBER,
The provisions on the reverse side hereof constitute a part of this agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this agreement has been necuted by the parties hereto. upon the date first above written.
ST ATE OF CALIFORNIA
CONTRACTOR
276 Fourth Ave., O1u1a Vista, CA 92010
TJTI.&
Executive Officer
. 80 000.00
~ Tn\,&
FWHEF
~ ftAJII
Department of Oenera1 Services
U.. Only
I certify that 1JU.s grant.
aneridment is exenpt fIan
Department of General
Services approval.
0~;/'p, . . . -r
3760- 1-748(1 ,.00
37 301-748 ( )89=8,000.00
_"'OVNT .NCUMUItC .Y
~ ~.NT
s
~'"
YOT~ AMOUNT IINCUMUItC
TO DAft CMIo4C:T 01' PNNDITUM ~ AND Tn\.m
. 88,000.00 Resource Dlhancement
, lane"" crrrf/~."",. trI~ ou."Il pfTIDFIGlltnou.'led,t 'MI hullJt.td lund.l art T.aA. NO.
eaadobl,. J","" ~ and PvPp05t OJ"" npmdlfure lUfd &boot.
.. """ 01' A~IHG OI'''~''
..It. NO.
DAft
x
U 1,~' 41
/3-9
. ..,
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
SUBMITfED BY:
1?357
Resolution Approving an agreement with Mr. Frank Chaboudy for
provision of professional tennis services and for operation of the Chula Vista
Tennis Center ~
Director of Parks and Recrea!,iok-:-
/,,; ,-<,
City Manager J' &,~ J /
(!
Item / t.j
Meeting Date 1/4/94
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
(4/Sths Vote: Yes _ No X)
The Chula Vista Tennis Center has been operated by a tennis professional, Mr. Frank Chaboudy,
since November 1985, under an agreement with the City. A new agreement has been prepared to
continue his professional tennis services. This agreement extends the term of Mr. Chaboudy's
agreement for three years.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council authorize the Mayor to sign the agreement for tennis services
beginning on February 1, 1994 and ending on January 31, 1997.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS: At its meeting of November 18, 1993, the Parks
and Recreation voted 4-0 (Carpenter, Helton, Palma out) to approve the agreement.
DISCUSSION: The City opened the Chula Vista Tennis Center complex at Southwestern College
in 1972, under a joint powers agreement with the Sweetwater Community College District. The
Center was to operate under contract with a tennis professional whose main duties included:
1. Operation of a pro shop.
2. Development of a comprehensive tennis program, including instruction classes for
youth and adults.
3. Coordination of City-sponsored tennis tournaments and clinics.
4. Daily maintenance of the four City tennis courts.
In November 1985, Council approved a three year agreement with Frank Chaboudy to operate the
Tennis Center. Council approved a new two year agreement with Mr. Chaboudy in 1988 and
approved a three year agreement in 1991. This Department has been satisfied with Mr. Chaboudy's
performance in operating the Center. Over the past eight years, he has kept the Center financially
solvent and programmatically sound. His success in developing a strong youth tennis curriculum,
the South Bay Junior Tennis Program, is especially noteworthy. The juniors program provides
group instruction for youth between the ages of 6 and 18 years old.
At present, 60 adults are receiving individual and/or group instruction. An adult clinic is held every
Wednesday evening with an average of sixteen to twenty men and women attending. Recently,
fifteen adults attended a two hour free clinic that was held for beginning players. During this past
year, 15 women participated in the Penn League Tennis. Eleven men participated in a Men's 4.0
Team which won the Southern California Championships, as well as several matches at the national
level. The touring adult players (22 in number) have represented the Chula Vista Tennis Center
by playing against other clubs in Arizona, Nevada, Mexico, and northern California.
TNISA113,93 December 21, 1993
Jr-j
Page 2, Item~
Meeting Date 1/4/94
The Junior Tennis Program continues to be very active. The Chula Vista Tennis Center, in
cooperation with the San Diego Tennis Patrons, sponsors several Junior Tournaments throughout
the year. In addition, the Tennis Center, in conjunction with the United States Professional Tennis
Association, offers free tennis instructions during the "Tennis Across America Day."
Tournaments are always popular to the Junior Tennis Program. The "Tournament Squad" (9 in
number) are junior players who compete in sectional, district and! or national tournaments. The
"Sanction" players (39 in number) are boys and girls who play sanctioned tournaments within
Southern California. The beginning players (33 in number) are just beginning their tournament
play by participating in satellite tournaments in San Diego County. The "Racquet Runts" (5 in
number) are four, five and six year old children who are learning lead-in skills in preparation for
more formal instruction. In addition, individual instruction is provided to 19 children who just
want to learn to play the game of tennis.
The Chula Vista Tennis Center has been working closely with the local high schools in Chula Vista.
During this past year, over one hundred hours of free tennis instructions have been provided to
students from Bonita High School, EastLake High School and Marian High School.
FISCAL IMPACf: The City currently collects approximately $2,550 in revenues annually through
the sale of parking permits for the Tennis Center parking lot. The Tennis Pro is compensated
through the fees collected from tennis lessons and tournaments.
TNISA113.93 December 28, 1993
JJ/~J
RESOLUTION NO.
/7.357
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH FRANK
CHABOUDY FOR PROVISION OF PROFESSIONAL TENNIS
SERVICES AND FOR OPERATION OF THE CHULA VISTA
TENNIS CENTER, AND AUTHORIZING MAYOR TO
EXECUTE SAME
WHEREAS, the Chula vista Tennis Center has been operated
by a tennis professional, Frank Chaboudy, since November, 1985,
under an agreement with the City; and
WHEREAS, a new agreement has been prepared to continue
his professional tennis services for an additional three years
until January 31, 1997.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby approve an Agreement with Frank
Chaboudy for Profess~onal Tennis Service and for operation of the
Chula vista Tennis Center, a copy of which is on file in the office
of the city Clerk.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of
Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said
agreement for and on behalf of the City of Chula Vista.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Jess Valenzuela, Director of
Parks and Recreation
C:\rs\tennis.pro
/'1-) 1/1-1
AGREEMENT FOR TENNIS SERVICES AND PERMIT
FOR USE OF THE CHULA VISTA TENNIS CENTER
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into in the City of Chula
Vista, California, this by and between the
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred
to as "CITY", and FRANK CHABOUDY, Tennis Professional, hereinafter
referred to as "PROFESSIONAL";
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the city is the owner of four tennis courts
("Courts") and a small ancillary structure currently housing a pro
shop, lounge, restrooms ("Pro Shop") located at the Southwestern
Community college campus in the city of Chula vista (the courts and
Pro Shop and related ancillary grounds, including the parking shall
herein be referred to as "Tennis Complex" or "Complex"); and,
WHEREAS,
particular the
good quality
services; and,
City desires that the general public, and in
residents of the City of Chula Vista, should have a
of municipally provided tennis facilities and
WHEREAS, Professional represents and warrants that he is able
to provide tennis instruction and complex management and
maintenance according to the terms of this agreement;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and upon the
terms and conditions contained herein, the City and the
Professional agree as follows:
I. License to Occupy and Use.
For the Term of this Agreement, City hereby grants a revocable
license to Professional to occupy and use the Tennis Complex for
the purposes of permitting the public to learn, enjoy and play the
sport of tennis, and in the manner herein specified:
II. TERM
A. The nominal term of this agreement, subject to special
termination as herein below provided, shall be for three years
beginning on February 1, 1994, and ending at midnight on January
31, 1997 ("Nominal Term").
tennisS.wp
November 1, 1993
Agreement for Tennis Services
Page 1
),/-5
B. special Termination. Notwithstanding the preceding
subsection, and in addition to the other remedies provided by City
within the terms of this agreement, city shall have the right, upon
thirty (30) days notice to the Professional to cancel this
agreement if, in the opinion of the City Manager, the operations
conducted by Professional are unsatisfactory and, after
Professional has been granted thirty (30) days to correct same,
they have not been corrected. In the event of such cancellation,
the replacement Professional obtained by the City shall purchase
from Professional his non-returnable inventory of merchandise for
sale at Professional's cost and his equipment at its fair market
value. In the event of disagreement on values, the City Manager
. shall establish a value which shall be binding upon the parties to
this agreement.
C. Definition: Term. As used herein, "Term" shall refer to
the period of time during which this agreement is actually in
effect which shall be the Nominal Term unless specially terminated
as herein provided.
D. At the conclusion of the Term of this agreement, the City
reserves the right to solicit and advertise for new proposals to
operate and manage the tennis facilities.
E. Upon the expiration of the agreement, the Professional
shall be expected to put the premises in as good a condition as at
the beginning of said contract, ordinary wear and tear excepted.
F. During the last thirty (30) days of the Term of this
facility use agreement, or within thirty (30) days of any
cancellation or other expiration, Professional shall remove at his
own expense his own furniture, furnishings, equipment and fixtures.
Should Professional fail to remove said items within said thirty
(30) day period, he shall lose all rights, title and interest in
said items, and City may elect to keep same upon the premises or to
sell, remove or demolish them. In the event of such sale, removal
or demolition, Professional shall reimburse City for any cost in
excess of any consideration received by city as a result of said
sale, removal or demolition.
III. FINANCIAL MATTERS
A. Accounting Matters.
1. The Professional shall keep adequate books and
records, make all tax returns and pay all taxes required in
connection therewith in his own name. Such books and records shall
be the property of the Professional but shall be open to the
inspection of the City by and through its City Manager or other
tennisS.wp
November 1, 1993
Agreement for Tennis Services
Page 2
)1j~ ~
M_"__,_",_~_"""",~"~",, ~..;"",~,,..,~"_.,"_,-.~"..,..,~.."~,""~."m,'."_"'___
duly authorized agent at reasonable times during business hours.
The Professional shall be required to maintain a method of
accounting of all the receipts and disbursements received or made
by said Professional from the operation of said concession.
2. The bookkeeping records installed and maintained by
the Professional shall be approved as to form by the City and shall
permit the preparation of statements of profit and loss and balance
sheet. The Professional shall submit to the city, on a semi-annual
basis, a financial statement indicating all profits, losses, and
balances of the operation of said Tennis Center. The City may
inspect and audit books and accounts and records of the
Professional at all times.
B. Responsibility for utilities.
The Professional shall pay all charges for gas, electrical
utilities, telephone service, and court washing expense necessary
to carryon the operations of the tennis complex unless otherwise
specified in the permit.
IV. CONSIDERATION FOR PROFESSIONAL.
As consideration for the services rendered by the Professional
and the services of all addi tional employees, it is expressly
understood and agreed by the parties hereto that the Professional
may retain the following revenue charged according to the
provisions of this Agreement:
1. All revenues from tennis lessons.
2. All revenues from repair of tennis equipment.
A. All fees collected at the Tennis Complex shall be the
exclusive property of the Professional. These fees shall be based
upon a posted fee rate and must be consistent with those charges
being made at other facilities within San Diego County. Any change
in these charges will be made only upon prior approval of the
Director of Parks and Recreation.
V. DUTIES OF THE PROFESSIONAL
A. Operation of Pro Shop.
1. Supplies and Equipment.
The Professional shall at his discretion keep and
maintain for sale an inventory of supplies and equipment in keeping
with the demand of the Tennis Complex and shall keep these items at
tennisS.wp
November 1, 1993
Agreement for Tennis Services
Page 3
Ir-7
prices recommended by the manufacturers of said merchandise. The
Professional shall operate all concessions as an independent
contractor. He shall purchase and pay for all materials and
merchandise used or sold in the operation of said concession in his
name, and at his own responsibility, and receive and retain all
income derived from the operation as his own and for sole use and
benefit.
2. Maintenance of Pro Shop Premises.
The Professional shall keep the Pro Shop premises
assigned by this agreement in a clean and sanitary condition and
free from rubbish at all times and shall assume complete
responsibility for janitorial services for said premises.
3. Equipment servicing.
The Professional shall be required to provide all
maintenance, repair and service required on all equipment used at
the Complex, or sold at the Pro Shop.
a. City Equipment.
In the event City owned equipment is used, the City
shall have the right to prescribe in detail the type and frequency
of maintenance and repair to be performed by the Professional.
Because of the city's interest in preserving its equipment and
providing clean and sanitary conditions in the event the
Professional fails to perform the work prescribed pursuant to the
above on city or Professional owned equipment, the City Manager or
Director of Parks and Recreation shall have the right, after ten
(10) days notice to correct the deficiency, to cause the prescribed
work to be performed in an efficient manner and to charge the
Professional for the cost thereof. Cost shall be equal to the sum
of the cost of the direct labor and materials necessary to perform
the work in an efficient manner plus overhead cost. No equipment
provided by the City shall be removed or replaced by the
Professional without prior written consent of the City Manager and
if consent is secured, such removal and/or replacement shall be to
the sole cost and expense of the Professional.
4. Furniture and Furnishings.
The Professional shall furnish and install at his own
expense in the Tennis Pro Shop building, all necessary furniture,
furnishings and equipment required in order to render sufficient
and adequate service, as determined by the city. Professional
further agrees that all furniture, furnishings and equipment will
be maintained and kept intact by repair or replacement as required
tennisS.wp
November 1, 1993
Agreement for Tennis Services
Page 4
/u/-y
at Professional's expense.
B. Maintenance and Operation of Tennis Complex.
The Professional shall provide necessary materials and
personnel at his own expense to adequately cover the operation of
the Tennis Complex, including specifically the Pro-Shop and four
(4) tennis courts, during the operating hours hereafter referred
to.
1. Courts. Professional shall be required to clean the
four (4) City-owned tennis courts daily before 9:00 a.m., cleaning
to including picking up of rubbish on courts, emptying trash
container, sweeping off excessive dirt from courts; washing of said
courts must be on a regular weekly schedule prior to 8:00 a.m.
2. Nets. The Professional shall maintain and replace
all tennis nets.
3. Parking Permits. The Professional shall distribute
parking permits for city-owned tennis facilities.
4. Light Coin-Meters. The Professional shall collect
all revenues from City-owned light meters.
s. Help. The Professional shall employ any and all
assistants that may be necessary to carry out the terms and
provisions of this agreement and shall pay their salaries and such
other and further sums as may be required of them for tax and other
purposes. If these assistants collect or handle any money due the
City of Chula Vista, they shall be approved as provided herein by
the City before being employed by the Professional. If, for any
reason, any of said assistants shall display flagrant misconduct,
he/she shall be dismissed at the request of the City Manager.
6. Staffing and Hours of Operation.
a. Except as may be otherwise provided by the City,
the Professional or a similarly qualified assistant shall be
present at the Tennis Complex during all hours in which the complex
is open to operate, supervise, promote and manage the functions
authorized by this agreement.
b. The Professional, his agents or employees in
sufficient number to handle Tennis Complex activities, shall be on
duty daily at the Tennis Complex, Monday through Saturday, weather
permitting, from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., excluding Sunday and
holidays. provisions shall be made to provide a method in
receiving telephone calls while on the court giving lessons. The
tenniss.wp
November 1, 1993
Agreement for Tennis Services
Page S
)'1-;
Pro Shop may be kept open additional hours at the discretion of the
Tennis Professional to meet the needs of the public.
c. The Professional shall not be absent from the
Tennis Complex for an excessive period in any week unless he is
representing the City of Chula vista by performing in a tennis
tournament. Such attendance must have the consent of the Director
of Parks and Recreation, except in instances of illness or during
vacation periods.
7. Maintenance of a Health-Conscious Environment.
Professional shall take such steps as are necessary to
create a health-conscious environment at the Tennis Complex. The
determination of such steps to take shall be made in the discretion
of Professional except that such steps shall include the
prohibition against smoking and against the consumption of alcohol
and illegal drugs.
C. Tennis Lessons.
It is agreed that in addition to his other duties hereunder,
the Professional shall cause instruction to be given in the game of
tennis. Tennis instruction shall be given only to bona fide
instructees, with individual lessons confined to one court at a
time (exception - see Premises) . Adult group lessons may be
conducted provided prior written approval is obtained from the City
both as to the hours during which group lessons may be conducted
and the location of courts which shall use only one court if five
(5) or less persons undertake group lessons and two (2) courts if
six (6) or more persons undertake instruction. Fees for such
instruction shall be in keeping with accepted custom and practices
in the tennis profession. Classes will be completely self-sustain-
ing. All proceeds will go to the Tennis Professional.
1. Professional shall be entitled to physically occupy
one (1) and, with the City's advance consent, possibly two (2)
courts at the Tennis Complex for the purpose of providing tennis
lessons to members of the public according to the following times,
days and rules:
a. The professional may be permitted the use of a
second court at the tennis center in accordance with the following
conditions:
(1) A second teaching court may be used with
prior written approval from the Director of Parks and Recreation.
Times and day must be included in any such request.
tennis5.wp
November 1, 1993
Agreement for Tennis Services
Page 6
)tj ~ If)
(2) If the Professional is using a second
court at times and days not approved, the following condition for
usage must be adhered to:
(a) No player may be asked to relinquish
his court in order to provide additional usage for the Professional
to make up canceled lessons.
(b) Professional must relinquish the
additional court to waiting players after completion of the lesson
in progress or after thirty (30) minutes.
D. Tennis Events.
1. The Tennis Professional will also coordinate
area-wide open tennis tournaments annually, one of which shall be
for Chula vista residents only.
2. The Professional shall coordinate, promote and
schedule such tennis events sponsored by, by way of illustration
but not limitation, the City of Chula vista, convention type
organizations, and such other recognized organizations as may from
time to time request scheduling of tennis events.
3. Youth Tennis Program. The Professional shall utilize
all four (4) tennis courts at the tennis center Monday-Friday
between the hours of 3:30 p.m. and 7:00 p.m.; and Saturday between
the hours of 1:00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m. for the Youth Tennis Program.
In addition, Professional shall utilize two (2) tennis courts at
the center on Sundays between the hours of 1:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m.
for the Youth Tennis Program. Chula vista residents shall receive
priority over non-residents in this program.
4. Adult Doubles Program. The Professional shall util-
ize two (2) tennis courts at the center from 6:30 p.m. to 7:00
p.m., and all four (4) tennis courts from 7:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. on
Wednesday for an open-enrollment adult doubles program. Chula
vista residents shall receive priority over non-residents if par-
ticipation reaches maximum levels in this program.
5. Access to Youth Tennis Program. Youth participating
in the Junior Tennis Program must maintain an academic grade point
average of at least 2.0.
E. Complex Promotion.
Under the direction of the City, the Professional shall
advertise and promote the Tennis Complex and shall be responsible
for such promotional functions. The Director of Parks and
tennis5.wp
November 1, 1993
Agreement for Tennis Services
Page 7
/LJ -' / /
Recreation or his/her designee shall approve all promotional
material prior to distribution.
F. signage.
No signs or advertising matter shall be displayed outside such
premises without prior consent of the city.
G. City's Inspection Rights.
The City shall have the right to enter upon said premises at
any and all reasonable times during the term of the permit for the
purpose of inspection and observation of the Professional's
operations. It is further agreed that the inspections may be made
by City employees, or may be made by independent contractors
engaged by the city. The City shall have the right to inspect for
the purposes set forth below; however, the enumerations below shall
not be construed to limit the City's right of inspection for any
purpose incidental to the right of the City Manager:
1. To determine if the terms and conditions of this
permit are being complied with.
2. To observe transactions between the Professional and
patrons in order to evaluate the quality and quantities
of food or drinks or other items sold or dispensed, the
courtesy extended to and method of dealing with the
public, the performance and caliber of the Professional's
employees, and the methods of recording receipts. It is
understood that the information gathered on these
inspections will be used to evaluate the Professional to
provide a basis for any action by the City Manager or
Director of Parks and Recreation or city for the removal
or denial or renewal of this permit.
H. Indemnity Provisions.
The Professional shall indemnify and hold harmless the City,
its officers, employees, or agents from any claims arising from the
use of the premises or from the operation of the Tennis
Professional Shop.
I. Insurance.
The Professional shall provide a policy of general liability
and property damage insurance approved by the City Attorney with
limits of $300,000 for injury to anyone person and anyone
accident, $500,000 to two or more persons from anyone accident or
occurrence, and $50,000 for property damage or $500,000 combined
tennis5.wp
November 1, 1993
Agreement for Tennis Services
Page 8
)1/ ~/:2
single limit and shall also carry a policy for Worker's
Compensation Insurance covering any and all employees.
Certificates evidencing coverage and a policy endorsement for the
general liability policy which names the City of Chula vista as
additional insured shall be filed with the city Clerk, 276 Fourth
Avenue, Chula Vista, CA.
J. Alterations or Additions.
It is further understood and agreed that the Professional
shall not make any alterations or additions to the Pro Shop or to
any equipment belonging to the City without first having the
consent of the City to such change or alteration.
1. The Professional shall be fully aware of the material
conditions of the Tennis Complex and tennis facilities at all
times, and as the conditions dictate, make specific recommendations
to the City for corrective actions as the City deems necessary.
The Professional shall not be held responsible for work performed
or lack of same by the City.
VI. City's Duties Regarding Professional and Tennis Complex.
A. Exterior Pro Shop Maintenance.
City agrees to maintain and repair the exterior and related
portions of the Pro Shop building, excluding repairs of major
proportion which are subject to coverage by Professional's
insurance.
VII. Assignability.
It is expressly understood and agreed that the Professional
may not sign or transfer any of the rights, licenses, or privileges
or any part thereof of this agreement without the written consent
of the city Council having been obtained. The agreement cannot be
assigned involuntarily or by operation or process of law and should
the Professional be adjudged bankrupt or become insolvent or make
a general assignment for the benefit of his creditors or fail to
obtain the release of any levy of attachment or execution upon his
payment within ten (10) days after such levy is made, the City may
consider such to be a breach of the agreement and may cancel and
terminate same.
tennisS.wp
November 1, 1993
Agreement for Tennis Services
Page 9
JtJ--1J
Signature Page to
AGREEMENT FOR TENNIS SERVICES AND PERMIT
FOR USE OF THE CHULA VISTA TENNIS CENTER
Dated:
, 199
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Tim Nader
Mayor of the City
of Chula Vista
ATTEST:
Beverly Authelet
City Clerk
Approved as to form by
B~~~~~
City Attorney
Dated: lk-(.t~ 2-f ' 199)
TENNIS PROFESSIONAL
4
tennisS.wp
November 1, 1993
Agreement for Tennis Services
Page 10
/tJ- Ii
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
November 18, 1993
PAGE 3
b. CIP UPDATE
Director Valenzuela gave an overview of the status of the Department's CIPs. In addition,
he discussed the Parks Implementation Plan and the current status of that.
c. TENNIS CENTER AGREEMENT
Director Valenzuela summarized the tennis center agreement for the Commissioners and
invited the Commissioners to raise any questions that they may have.
Motion to approve the agreement.
MSC SANDOV AL-FERNANDEZlALEVY 4-0 (Carpenter, Helton, Palma out)
7. COMMUNICATIONS
a. Written Correspondence
NONE
b. Commissioner's Comments
WILLETT - gave a status report on CALP A W
Adjournment to the next regularly scheduled meeting of December 16, 1993.
Respectfully submitted,
,/'
JL/ - /p
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
/5
Meeting Date 1/4/94
SUBMITTED BY:
Public Hearing on Adoption of the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Pumped
Flows Fee
Director of Public Works r
City Manager 1{; ~ r (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No X)
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
On December 7, 1993, Council continued the Public Hearing for the adoption of Telegraph
Canyon Sewer Pumped Flows Fee to January 4, 1994.
Staff has held meetings with the developers affected and, though the concept of the fee is
agreed to, there is still further discussion continuing on the implementation of the fee.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council continue the public hearing to January 18, 1994.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
CST:SB/ENGlNEER/AGENDA/PUMPFLOW.CON
122393
/5~/
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item /1/
Meeting Date 1/4/94
ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing to consider the partial waiver of Transportation Development
Impact Fees for Lots 5 and 6 of Map 12267 (Rancho Del Rey Business Center)
Resolution / 73 s:z. Approving waiver of additional Transportation
Development Impact Fees for the parcels in Rancho Del Rey known as Lots 5 and
6 of Map 12267
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public WOrk"tltrf
REVIEWED BY: City Manager 1bb 7f (4/5ths Vote: Yes_NolO
Jerome's Furniture Warehouse proposes to locate in the Rancho Del Rey Business Center which was
assessed Transportation Development Impact Fees (TDIF) through an assessment district formed over
the lots proposed for development. The TDIF assessed in the assessment district was based upon an
industrial use for Lots 5 and 6. Jerome's Furniture is proposed to locate on a parcel which is now zoned
commercial and is considered a commercial use which is assessed at a higher rate. Jerome's has
requested a waiver of fees based upon SANDAG trip generation rates which indicate that a furniture
store generates less traffic than most industrial uses. Jerome's, therefore, has requested a waiver of
additional (TDIF) for their project Waiver of the fees is required to be considered by the City Council
in accordance with Ordinances 2547 and 2251.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the resolution waiving the requirement for Jerome's Furniture
Warehouse to pay an estimated $177,840 in additional Transportation Development Impact Fees. The
actual amount would be based on the final acreage.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMEND A TION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Background
The Transportation Development Impact Fees (TDIF) for the Rancho del Rey Business Center were paid
through two assessment districts. Most of the land had debt placed on it as if the land gen'erated traffic
at an industrial rate based on the zoning in place at the time. Certain other parcels which were zoned
for commercial uses had debt placed on it as if the land generated traffic at a commercial rate. The uses
for these commercial-type parcels included furniture retail, such as Jerome's Furniture Warehouse. On
this basis, staff determined that since Jerome's is proposing to locate on a parcel which has industrial
TDIF debt on it but is now zoned for commercial uses, they would be subject to paying additional fees
($177,480) to meet the commercial rate. This would be in addition to the $326,040 already being "paid"
through the assessment district.
1&-/
Page 2, Item I ~
Meeting Date 1/4/94
Request to Waive Fees
Under Section 5 of Ordinance No. 2251, and as amended, a property owner may apply to the Council
for a fee reduction or waiver if "application of the fee imposed...is unrelated to mitigation of the traffic
needs or burdens of the development.... " Jerome's has made such application in their letter dated
December 1, 1993 (Attachment 1). Jerome's requests that the additional fee be waived because their
trip generation rate according to Sandag is only 100 trips/acre which is less than the average industrial
rate of 200 trips/acre ($61,200), and substantially less than the average commercial rate of 400
trips/acre ($122,400), that is outlined in the TDIF program (1990).
Staff agrees with their estimate of 100 trips/acre. This is substantiated by SANDAG and Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE) studies. While the TDIF program assumes average trip generation
rates of 200 and 400 trips/acre for industrial and commercial land, it is expected that some parcels will
be over and some will be under the average. In Jerome's case, staff believes that fees paid at the
industrial rate are adequate because only 100 trips per acre is anticipated which is below the
assessment district rate of 200 trips per acre. Additionally, staff recognizes that the addition of
Jerome's to this area of the City is of economic benefit to the City because of job creation and tax
revenues. Consequently, staff recommends waiving the additional fees due to the lower anticipated
traffic generation rate of the proposed development.
Further, in accordance with Ordinance 2547, Council must find that a peculiar economic hardship or
other injustice would result to the applicant which outweighs, when balanced against, the need of the
City for revenue and the need for a uniform method of recovering same from those against whom it
is imposed. Staff recommends that Council find that waiving the fee corrects an injustice in that the
additional fee collected is unrelated to the mitigation of the traffic needs or burdens of the
development.
Impact to TDIF Program
The current TDIF program (1990) will be effective for another year, after which the methodology for
calculating the fee will change as approved by Council in December, 1993. The present program
utilizes traffic generation rates of 200 and 400 trips per acre for industrial and commercial land
respectively. After January 1, 1995 the program will utilize generation rates of 200 and 250 trips per
acre for industrial and commercial land respectively. The present TDIF program does not anticipate
these additional fees to be paid. The TDIF for 1995 anticipated payment of additional fees due to the
rezone of these parcels to commercial use. However, the 1995 program utilizes different generation
rates and a different cost per EDU rate. Consequently, if another commercial use not subject to this
fee waiver were to construct in 1995, instead of 1994, the additional fees charged would only be
$57,971 (additional 50 trips per acre on 2.9 acres at $399.80 per trip) instead of $177,480 (additional
200 trips per acre on 2.9 acres at $306 per trip). The impact of this fee waiver to the 1995 TDIF
program then is $57,971 which is less than $2.50 per EDU. This does not account for the amount
estimated at $59,450, which would be charged in 1995 for the SR 125 DIF. Additionally, the impact
to the fee program may be even less should the properties change use to a different, higher trip
generating use in the future because the fee waiver only applies to the use, not the land.
1&-.2,
Page 3, Item / ~
Meeting Date 1/4/94
Notice
Under Ordinance 2547, which adopted the Master Fee Schedule, Council must conduct a public
hearing, notice of which is not required to be published. Notice is required to be given to the
applicant and any other party or parties requesting notice. The applicant, Rancho Del Rey Investors
and the CIF have received notice.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approval of the resolution will reduce the TDIF revenues collected now by $177,480, but as indicated
above, would have a long range impact of reducing the fee collected by 57,971. The $177,480 being
waived would have been taken into account in the next TDIF update. The effect on the fee at that
time would have been minor.
DDSlFile No.: HX-OOl
WPC F:\home\engineer\agenda\rdrtdif
Attachments: / )
1 - Letter from Jerome's Furniture Warehouse (c1-
2 - Sandag traffic generation rates NOT SCANNED
/~-J 1/6 -1
RESOLUTION NO.
/739
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING WAIVER OF ADDITIONAL
TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES FOR
LOTS 5 AND 6 OF MAP 12267 (RANCHO DEL REY
BUSINESS CENTER)
WHEREAS, Jerome's Furniture Warehouse proposes to locate
in the Rancho Del Rey Business Center which was assessed
Transportation Development Impact Fees (TDIF) through an assessment
district formed over the lots proposed for development; and
WHEREAS, the TDIF assessed in the assessment district was
based upon an industrial use for Lots 5 and 6 and Jerome's
Furniture is proposed to locate on a parcel which is now zoned
commercial and is considered a commercial use which is assessed at
a higher rate; and
WHEREAS, Jerome's has requested a waiver of fees based
upon SANDAG trip generation rates which indicate that a furniture
store generates less traffic than most industrial uses; and
WHEREAS, Jerome's, therefore, has requested a waiver of
additional (TDIF) for their project; and
WHEREAS, waiver of the fees is required to be considered
by the City Council in accordance with Ordinances 2547 and 2251;
and
WHEREAS, staff estimates Jerome's Furniture Warehouse
would pay an estimated $177,840 in additional Transportation
Development Impact Fees although the actual amount would be based
on the final acreage.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby find that imposing additional
Transportation DIF would constitute both a peculiar economic
hardship and injustice tD Jerome's which outweighs the City's
revenue need, and be unrelated to the traffic burdens of the
proposed use, based on the significantly reduced trip generation of
such use, and therefore approve waiver of additional Transportation
Development Impact Fees for use of the parcels in Rancho Del Rey
known as Lots 5 and 6 of Map 12267 as a furniture store.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
C:\rs\rdrtdif
'>-, ^ ~
...~~ ... s'
Bruce M. BOOg,~tty
Attorney
/&-3' //6 - ~
DEC-02-1993 84:42PM FROM JERCJ'IES FllRNI~ SD
TO
5855612
P.l2
.......
FURNITURE WAREHOUSE
OeeentJer I, 1993
Mr. John Lippitt, Director
Department of Public Works
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
(hula Vista, tA 91910
RE: REQUEST FOR lRANSP(RTATION DIF WAIVER
Dear Mr. Lippitt"
Pursuant to SectiO,n, 5 '. of Ordinanc~"No~, ?Z51"i~An.()rd:inance of the City of Chula Vista,
C~Hfornia, E$'tab1tth"!.n~a Deve~~~~~!f'l~~~e~~~~r'Pl'r-for Transportation Facilities in the
C,ty's Eastern:iferr.itories,. we heretiy'~reques{1Jfne'City Councll's approval of a waiver of the
Transportation DIF for a proposed furniture store at San D1ego County Tax Assessor's Parcel
Numbers 640-291-05 and 06. I
The sUbject property lias prepaid the Transportation DIF through the establishment of
Assessment District 88.,.2 at an amount equivalent to -industrial development. - The
"industrial d~,velopment~ fee is based on an average trip generation rate of 200 trips per
acre. A furniture 'store has a trip generation rate of 100 trips per acre which is one-half
the usumed industrial trip generation rate. It would therefore be inappropriate and
unreasonable to charge this property an additional DIF based on the .commercial development
rateR of 400 ~rips per acre. It is for this reason that we request the City Council's
approval of at/aiver of any additional Transportation DIF.
, 'i. (~ '.
In granting th,s req~est, it will allow Jerome's Furniture Warehouse to establish an even
greater presence i,nCbula Vista. Inc1dentally, the economic benefit resulting from the jobs
that would be'l~re~ted and the tax revenues generated if our projected $10,000,000 annual
sales volumes~re met is significant.
\"
. (;,
~'. ; ~ : ; ..,
)' "
,. I':',
t' "I....
I ..
I
.' t J
~. .
'e
rl'l,' ":;.'
, '-1:'
......
'~! 'j ~
,",. . .1: .. ~ .f 'C :
'j
IN:gn
fl' ,~' . '
cc: Cliff Swabson/City (ngineer,t\: " " ,":
George Krempl, Oeputy City ~nager . ,
'i ... '; -: i -. .
'i.
.~; i
~ . :
I ;
. ,~
"
1..1
c:
"f..
"
Mot "E"Shd l
S. ~ CA ll2101 -lIl>>9 '
(l)1~231.17S7 ,
fAX l$18)231 ~'Z31.a406
180lllI v.Iecb lid
SID INaIr. fA fl?059..Zm '
(Il1~ 7......851 1727..f1>>fJ
FAA 115'-Qj 74+ leG8i I
"
..
'1~1htd~
OlD 'AU. CA 8C!011-43Q1l
fl1S) 421.1961
fAX(61!l) 421.0962
,!' '
333 Mil..........
, EI 0iiDn. fAIIZQ2O.3tt3
tB10442-3331
, FNc(ll19)442.W74
tOJiC TrMnta.!
"~CAllZ131.101t
(819) 695-1300
F41C t8fSl) ees.e283
TOTAL P. e2
, ,
tl
"
/,t, -7 //0~/!)
ATTACHMENT 1
"'~s OF 8~ San Diego
:-~~~~(\ ASSOCIATION OF
~ \t' GOVERNf.lEl\~
~_ / ~ ~~t~ e::~:,.t Inte,.tate Plaza
~HE RE~ San Diego, California 92101
_ ~ (619)595-5300 Fax (619)595-5305
NOTE: This Iiat only repre..ntl ellYidt of everage. or estimated. treffic generetion ~ ratel for lend usel (emphasil on eereage
end building aquare footage) in the San Diago region. The.. driveway ratel (which do not cetagorize primary. linked. or pala-by trip types)
..subject to change as future documentation becomes available. or ulocal aourcel Ire updated. for more specific information regarding
traffic data and trip retes. please refer to th. San Diego Traffic Generetora ma~1. AlwIYS chect with local jurildictionl for their preferred
or eppIiceble rates.
.
BRIEF GUIDE OF VEHICULAR
TRAFFIC GENERATION RATES
FOR THE SAN DIEGO REGION
MARCH 1193
LAND USE
AgricuIlure (Open Spece)
Moporta
CommerciI'
QeneraIAviation
HeIiponI
Aanomobile
Car Walh
Guoline
lelel (Deeler It Repair)
Aano Repair Center
Iriing
lenk (wd~ only)
.... (w/~through)
on-through only
SavinOI It LoIIn
Drive4hrouoh only
CemetariU
ChurdI (or Synagogue)
Cornmerciel,lRetail Centers
Super R.gionl' Shopping Center
(More thin 60 acres. more than
100.000 sq. ft.. w/uaullly 3+
....jor lIores)
legionel Shopping Cente,
(3~0 acres. 300.~00.000
Ill. ft.. w/usvelly 2+ mljor stores)
Community Shopping Center
(10.30 acres. too.ooo.300.ooo sq. ft..
w/usually 1 ....jor lIore and detached
-'lUrent)
....hborhood Shopping Center
(~.. then to 8Cfel.le.. thin
100,000 sq. ft.. w/uauelly grocery
atoll It druo lIore)
~ Shops
(also IlriP ~rc:il1)
lupermerltet
c:._lOenol Mllrltet
DiIcount Club
DiIcount Store
Furniture Store
Lumber Store
~tpeint hire
Garden Nurlery
IIIucation
UnMrsiIY (C .,.era)
Junior College (2 ,un)
High School
MidcIle/ Junior High
IIemenwY
Day Cell
ttoIPitell
General
~
.
.
HIGHEST PEAK HOUIl .. tPaue UI:OUT ;;;;:;./
aetwe.n ,.. A.M. a.twe.n'" P.M.
ISTIMATED WEEKDAY VEHICLE
nIP GENERAnON RATE
21--
12/acre. 100/flillht. 70/1000 sq. ft.-
I/Icre. 3 flight. 7/__ .ircraft' -
100/acre"
ft (I:C) n. (1:6)
1~ (I:C) 16~ (1:6)
.~ (6:6) ~ e6:6)
I~ (6:6) 12" (6:6)
,.. (7:3) ft eC:I)
I~ (7:3) ,,~ ":1)
... (7:3) ... eC:8)
,.. (1:4) 1~ (6:6)
" (6:5) ".. (6:6)
ft ~
... 16..
.~ (1:2) ~ (1:6)
ft (7:3) ~ (1:6)
ft (7:3) ~ (6:6)
" el:C) 1~ (6:6)
.~ (I:C) 11~ (1:6)
a (1:4) ft .:1)
.~ (7:3) 1~ (1:1)
"' (1:6) ft (6:1)
1~ (1:2) ~ (1.6)
ft el:C) 1~ el:6)
.~ (7:3) ft (6:5)
n. el:C) ft (1:6)
ft (I:C) ft e6:5)
a (I:C) 1~ 15:6)
1~ (1:1) ft (3:7)
1ft (1:1) ~ (3:7)
zo.. '1:2) ,.~ (3:7)
2C"" (7:3) 7.. (3:7)
II"" '1:4) ... (3:7)
1~ (1:6) ,... (5:5)
ft (7:3) 1~ (3:7)
n. '1:4) n. ..:e)
toO/site.IOO/.ere"
7f>>O/ll8tion. 130/pump"
IO/tooo Iq. ft.. 300/acre.IO/-w:.ll8lr-
20/1000 sq. ft.. 4OO/acre, 20/MMce ItIlr
160/1000 sq. ft.. 1ooo/lcre' 0'
200/1000 all. ft.. 1500/acre'
300( 160 _y)/lane.
10/1000 Iq. ft.. lOO/acre"
100 (50 _y)/lane"
I/acre'
12/1000 sq. ft.. CO/acre" (1riple retal
for Sunday. or deys of ....mbly)
4O/tooo sq. ft.. 4OO/acre'
'O/tooo sq. ft..IOO/acre'
70/1000 sq. ft.. 700/lcre' -
120/1000 sq. ft.. 1Z00/acre' -
40/1000 lei. ft.. 4OO/etn'
150/1000 Iq. ft.. tooo/etno..
100/tooo sq. ft."
10/1000 sq. ft.. lOO/acre-
70/tooo sq. ft., lOO/lcre-
1/1000 sq. ft.. 100/acreo,
10/1000 sq. ft.. 160/etn-
10/1000 sq. ft..1OO/acreo,
40/1000 lei. ft..1O/.ereoo
2.1/ttudenl. 100 etnO
1.l/stUdent. IO/acre'
1.C/llUdent. 1 t /1000 Ill. ft.. lO/etnO ..
1.0/llUdent. 40/acre-
1.C/lludent. 1C/1ooo Ill. ft..1O/acre-
./chIId. 10/1000 Ill. ft.o,
to/bed. 20/1000 Ill. ft.. 200/acre.
I/bed'.
(over) / b-Q
MEMBER AGENCIES: Cities of Carlabad. Chull Vilta, Coronldo, Del Mar. El Cajon. Encinitas. Eacondido, Imperill Beach. ~ Mela,
Lemon Grove. Nationll City, Oceanside, POWlY, San Diego. San Marcos, Sant.., Sollna Beach. Vlatl and County of ~n D~.go.
ADVISORY/LIAISON MEMBERS: California Department of Tranlportation, U.S. Department of Defenee and TijuanalBaJI California.
ATTACHMENT 2 - Sheet 1 of 2
i6 .
InduI1riII
~ P8Itt (QOIM\III'CIiII incWId) '1111000 Ill. L. 2DOiain. '" =~ '" (2:8)
InduniaI P... (no CIlln'WMRliaI) 1{1000 Ill. fL. lCliacre. '11'" '12'" (2:8)
InduniaI PIMt (1I'lUNple thiIlI) 'ICIt1 000 Ill. tL. 1201acre. '14'" (1:2) 15'" (3:7) ,
~AIMmbIy 4V1 000 eq. fL.lO{acre" 10'" g:l) 10'" ~:I)
W~ 1(1000 eq. ft..lOIacre" 15'" :3) 'I'''' 4:1)
... .,000 eq. tl, 02lvM*. ~acn. .'" :5) " :5)
8ciInoe...... & DI.~"..1t 1{1000 eq. L.1Clt-.. 'I'''' . (1:1) '14'" (1 :I)
Unry 1CIt1000 eq. L. GJlacn" K (1:2) 'I~ (1:5)
I.IIdgIng
.... (.i4__1Iion ~Il:, !k.1"WIl) 'I~ IOCtfacn .'" (1:4) n (1:4)
..., ttr-n. 2DOi-.. '''' (4:1) " ~:4)
~ Hole! ~ 1~acn. I'" CU) no :I)
-..ry U..-.ry &....71 ,.......r ft (1:1) ,~ (2:8)
0lIi0n
....... ~ 0Ifi0e "000 Ill. L.lllCliacn. '''''' (1:1 ) ''''' (2:1)
.... '*' 100.000 eq. tL)
~) ComrMrcieI 0Ifi0e 1711000 eq. L.lOOtacre. ,"" (1:1) M'" (2:1)
'*' 100.000 eq. ft.)
CorporatI ClIIioe (lingle IIMr) 'ICIt1ooo eq. ft.. '4Cltacn. tI'" 1:;' ) tI'" S~
Gowe_nt (Civic Center) 10(1000 eq. tL.. " .1) ,"
Poet ClIIioe (~-in only) to{1ooo lei. tL .. I'" no
CcImnvlIl)' P.O. (not Inclucling mall drop line) 20011000 lei. tL.'IJOCI{acre- .'" (1:4) " (1:5)
CcImnvlIl)' p.o. (wfmU drop lane) 100/1000 eq. tL. 2000{acre. no ~:5) 'I~ 1:5)
Mail Drop I.Mle only 1500 (750 --y)llane. 7'" :5) '2'" :5)
DIpemlent of Motr:Ir VehicIH '110(1000 eq. tL.lOOIacre" .'" 1:4) ,,'" 4:1)
...... 10(1000 eq. ft..lOOiacn. .'" :2) 'I~ :7)
P....
City (...I~F'cI) lOtacn.
RegioMI (developed) lOiacre.
~(unde..IoF'cI) liacre. 4'" ''''
AmuMlnenl (Theme) lQiacre. 1~acn <--- 0Iftt0/'J.. .'" (1:4)
San Diego Zoo , 15(_..
... WorIcI lOIacre.
ReorMtion
leach. 0aNn or Bay 100(1000 tL ehoNIine.lO(acn. ,,'" (4:1)
leach. .... (tre8h ...r) 1O{1ooo ft. ehoreIine. 5(_..
eowIng Cemtr __.3OOfacre" '"' (7:3) 1'''' (4:1)
~ 4/campaite.. ..'" ''''
GoII CourM lIacre.IOOiClOUlN" .'" (1:2) " (3:7)
Marinu 4Iberth. 201_.. .. I'" (3:7) no (1:4)
RIoqudldIHe8llh Club 4011000 lei. tL.lllCliacre. 4Q{oourt" ..'" (8:4) " ~:4)
Tennis Courts 'Ii-.. 3Oioourt"" I'" 'I'''' :5)
8porlI FaciIiliea
Outdoor Stadium lO{acre. O.2l...\"
Indoor ~ 101_.. O. ,,...\"
.....ack 4Q{acre. 0.8 ...\"
,...,. (1ftlAIipIax) 1Qi1ooo eq. fL. U/..a\" 0"'''' n (7:3)
ReeicIenlIaI
'1: FamI)' Detached 'I._.linll unit" .'" (2:1) ,~ (7:3)
wrage 4 DUlacre) .,...Iine unit" .'" C2:1) ,~ (7:3)
Condominil.m
tany~.... '*'
DUI-.) tIdweIinll unit" n (2:1) " (7:3)
....nta
(or any~ ... men
'*' 20 DUI-')
MobiIeHorne
FMIiIy 1tcf',q1inll unIl. 4Cltacn. " (1:7) ," (1:4)
Mllla Only fIdweIIinll unIl. lOiacre. K (:1:7) ,~ (1:4)
lWlement CommunIty ~Uing unII""
fIIuraI Estate 'I2IdweIling unII""
. c....... Cere FedIily 1/d...,1Iing unII"" '" .:4) n (1:5)
..II.....
QlIaIity 'I0CIt1000 eq. L. ....lOOiacn.- ,'" ;:4) n ~:3)
lit IIDwn.Iigh U'/IDWf 15011000 lei. ft.. 7/11at, 'I2OOIacre.- n :5) .'" :4)
Peat Food (w4dIi_twough) 7OO{1ooo eq. fL. ~ lOOCItacn-- 4'" (1:4) .'" (1:5)
T...eportaIion FaaIIliI. 1111000 eq. tL-
.. Dlpot (4:1) " (1:5)
Truak TennNJ 'ICII1 000 lei. fL. ,,,.., .ewa-" ftt -
WaItrport 'I7OtbIr1h. 'I2Iacn" ,.'" ;:7)
Tr8IWIt Station (RaIl) 1llCli-." ,..'" g:l
... & Ride LDlI GJlacn (IClOipavM ecn). 'I"'" ,.'" :7)
-ftI'IrIwy _: San Dlago TIdic ~ ATTACHMENT 2 - Sheet 2 of 2
_ 0lIwr .....:ITE T,*, GenIlWfIorI ~ T,*, o.n.dDl'l...... (GItter""""). .... ~G I CALTAANS...... ,.,...,.
end "",fa.
/~-I
" _......._,.'"w~__~_.~_,.,.o_._,_"".,~~.. e' ~_~_'"_._.~"~~"..~"...~-.k....._
.
FURNITURE WAREHOUSE
January 4, 1994
Chris Salamone
Director of Community Development
City of Chula Vista
276 4th Ave.
Chula Vista CA 91010
RE: RANCHO DEL REV
Dear Mr. Salamone,
Be informed that we intend to operate both the 3rd Avenue and the proposed Rancho
Del Rey Jerome's stores. We see the existing store catering to Chula Vista,
Imperial Beach, San Ysidro and Tijuana which is a slightly different market than
the eastern suburbs which would be serviced by the new location. We believe
there will be sufficient growth in the area to support both locations. Also, we
own the 3rd Avenue property which should indicate our commitment to that area.
In addition, since families make furniture purchases only every four to five
years, store buying patterns for furniture change very slowly. The existing
location is beginning its tenth year and we don't want to loose its developed
goodwill. FEDMART successfully operated from the same location while adding a
newer location at Broadway and Palomar not two miles away.
I cannot guarantee that we shall operate both locations beyond my financial
control, but I assure you that we internally have a plan to operate from both
locations.
Warehouse
JVN:gn
/6-//
1401 T Street
San Diego. CA 92101-6699
(619) 231-1757
FAX (619)231-8623/231-8406
780 Los Vallecitos Blvd.
San Marcos. CA 92069-2723
(619) 744-4851/727-6030
FAX (619) 744-1858
1385 Third Avenue
Chula Vista. CA 92011-4302
(619) 427-1961
FAX (619) 427-0962
333 No. Johnson Avenue
EI Cajon. CA 92020-3113
(619) 442-3331
FAX (619) 442-9774
10724 Treena Street
San Diego. CA 92131-1011
(619) 695-1300
FAX (619) 695-6283
RESOLUTION NO.
I 7 .3~J
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA SUPPORTING CALIFORNIANS FOR PARKS
AND WILDLIFE BOND ACT OF 1994
WHEREAS, the City of Chula vista finds that providing
park and recreation services is of vital environmental, social and
economic interest to the citizens of our community; and
WHEREAS, a coalition of community and conservation
groups, business and labor, historic preservation and other
organizations have undertaken a volunteer, community based effort
to place a park, recreation and wildlife General Obligation Bond
Act on the June, 1994 ballot; and
WHEREAS, the bond act will provide needed facilities for
the enhancement of our community, including urban forestry, park
and recreation facilities, historic preservation, and a wide
variety of other programs; and
WHEREAS, CALPAW '94 includes funding for at-risk youth
facilities, in order to reduce crime, drug activity, and gang
violence in our community; and
WHEREAS, the City of Chula vista will receive an
estimated $10 million for development of park and recreation
facilities if CALPAW '94 is approved by the voters; and
WHEREAS, the following specific projects benefitting our
community are included in CALPAW '94: Otay Regional Park
Acquisition and Restoration and $360,000 based on a per capita
basis; and
WHEREAS, additional funds may be available through
competitive grants for urban recreational needs.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby endorse the CALPAW ' 94
initiative, and also endorses the specific proposition that
contains the measure as it will appear on the June 1994 ballot.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Tim Nader, Mayor
F:\home\aUomey\calpaw
/ ?-j / /7-.2-
:j: k-",YI 17
January 3, 1994
FROM:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
John D. Goss, City Manager f1
Jess Valenzuela, Director of~arks and Recreatio~,
TO:
VIA:
SUBJECT:
Local benefits from CALP A W
.'
Following is an overview of the dollar benefit of CALPAW, with potential dollars to be
received for local projects broken out.
DESIGNATED SAN DIEGO COUNTY PROJECTS
Otay Valley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. $10,000,000
* 1994 BOND ACT PER CAPITA ALLOCATIONS & ROBERTI-Z'BERG-HARRIS
BLOCK GRANTS
City of Chula VISta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $538,485
STATEWIDE COMPETITIVE GRANT FUNDING THAT COULD BENEFIT
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Urban Forests ........................................... $5,000,000
At-Risk Youth Programs ................................... $10,000,000
River Parkways ......................................... $15,000,000
Urban Streams ......................................... $15,000,000
Community Conservation Corps. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. $15,000,000
Trails ................................................ $15,000,000
STATEWIDE PROJECTS THAT COULD BENEFIT THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Boating and Waterways .................................... $5,000,000
Coastal Conservancy. ..................................... $30,000,000
Wildlife Conservation Board ................................ $19,000,000
*
Based on 1988 population figures - amounts could be significantly higher
/7-3
Minutes of a
Regular Meeting of the
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
~
DRAFT /7
Thursday 6:30 p.m.
December 16, 1993
Public Services Building
Conference Room 2&3
*******************
1. ROIL CAlL
Members present:
Members late:
Commissioners, Sandoval-Fernandez, Alevy, Willett, Palma, Carpenter
Commissioners Helton (6:40), Hall (7:07)
2. AFPROV AL OF MINUTFS
The minutes of the meeting of November 18, 1993 were approved as distributed.
MSC ALEVY/CARPENTER 6-0 (HALL OUT)
3. PUBUC HEARINGS OR REMARKS
NONE
4. DIRECfOR'S REPORT
Director Valenzuela gave the Commissioners an update on the Department's CIP projects.
In addition, he gave a summary of the holiday activities being conducted by the Department.
Director Valenzuela informed the Commissioners about the awards that the Department has
recently received from the State of California and displayed the awards for the
Commissioners.
5. REPORTS FOR INFORMATION ONLY
a. Youth Action Plan
Deputy Director Sunny Shy gave a progress report on the Youth Action Plan, including the
various components for middle school and high school age young people. In addition, she
distributed information about the upcoming special event, the Battle of the Bands.
Ms. Shy was commended by several of the Commissioner members on the quality of the work
that she and her staff have done thus far and on her continuing level of commitment to the
youth of Chula Vista.
}7-i
j
~
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
December 16, 1993
PAGE 3
Motion to approve Alternative B as presented to be incorporated into the master plan.
MSUC WILLETI'ISANDOV AL-FERNANDEZ 7-0
c. Sweetwater Riverbed Condition (West of Golf Course)
Director Valenzuela called the Commission's attention to the draft letter contained in the
Commission packet and asked for input from the Commissioners.
Commissioner Willett asked that all of the Commissioner sign the letter as well as the
Director.
New Business
NONE
7. COMMUNICATIONS
a. Written Correspondence
NONE
b. Commissioner's Comments
ALEVY -Thanked the Director for quick action on the Sweetwater River item and
commended staff on the quality of their work.
WILLETI -Concurred with Commissioner Alevy in his commendation of staff.
PALMA-Thanked staff for their work in Otay.
CARPENTER- Expressed her enthusiasm for the Youth Action Plan.
HALL-Iterated the importance of recreation in people's lives.
HELTON-stated that she was glad to be back with the Commission after her recent absence.
Adjournment to the next regularly scheduled meeting of January 20, 1993.
Respectfully submitted,
4~efit(dv
/7~5
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
Jr
Meeting Date 01/04/94
ITEM TITLE:
Report on Hosting an International Friendship
Festival in Chula Vista
SUBMITTED BY:
International Friendship Commission
(4/5ths Vote: YeS___No~)
The City Council at their September 24, 1991 meeting, requested a
report from the International Friendship Commission regarding the
possibility of hosting an International Friendship Festival similar
to the one hosted by the City of EI Cajon in 1991.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City not proceed
with hosting an International Friendship
Festival.
DISCUSSION:
The International Friendship Commission has researched the
International Friendship Festival sponsored by the City of El Cajon
(estimated cost $45,867) and has determined that the International
Friendship Commission could conduct a smaller event in the City of
Chula Vista for approximately $20,000.
While the Commission believes that there may be merit to future
funding of such an event, it is not recommended at this time due to
fiscal constraints and the lack of available staff resources to
coordinate an International Friendship Festival.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Not Applicable
/~~/
DRAFT
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
INTERNATIONAL FRIENDSHIP COMMISSION
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
November 22, 1993
4:05 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Chairperson Taboada, Vice-Chairperson
Ramirez, Members Alvarez, Baker, Carman,
DeLaMata, Thomas.
MINUTES:
The minutes had several corrections to be made.
Under Special Meetings it should read - The general
consensus of the IFC is that all special meetings will
be held at 4:00 P.M. and that the Commissioners will
notify the secretary in writing of which days they will
be available.
Under finished Business - Section D - The motion should
read "That the monies be transferred to the IFC. In the
future, before we get involved, we make a clear
decision as to where the monies should be allocated.
MSC (Carman/DeLaMatal To accept the minutes as
corrected.
Vote:
Yes: Alvarez, Baker, Carman, DeLaMata,
Ramirez, Taboada, Thomas.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A. US/Mexico Sister City Conference In January, 1994, in Santa
Fe, New Mexico - Terry Thomas is asking to go to the
conference and would like to run for the State Board again
this year.
MSC (Ramirez/DeLaMata) Moved to authorize expenditure of the
$100.00 for registration and designate Terry Thomas as an
official delegate and endorse her to run for the board
again.
The motion was amended to include that if any other
Commissioner decided latter that they wanted to attend,
they could mail in a check and give the secretary a copy of
the check and the enrollment form and they would be
reimbursed.
Both Ramirez & DeLaMata accepted the amendment to the
motion.
Vote:
Yes: Alvarez, Baker, Carman, DeLaMata, Ramirez,
Taboada, Thomas
No: None
J~/c2
B. CV/USA Team to General Roca, Argentina - The team will be
leaving either December 1st or 2nd and we already voted for
them to be our official delegates to our Sister City General
Roca and the Mayor is preparing a Proclamation from the City
for them to take. We also have a wall hanging from the
Commission to send to the Mayor of General Roca.
MSC (Ramirez/Thomas) (This is a two part motionlMove that
the Chairperson send a letter to the Mayor of General Roca
on behalf of the Commission to further our relations with
General Roca, our first Sister City. In the letter, mention
the gift of the quilt wall hanging we are sending to the
City from the City of Chula Vista and give an explanation of
the significants of the symbol.
(Second part of motion) That the IFC authorizes $100 to be
given to the CV/USA Team with the understanding that the
team will act as ambassadors for the City of Chula Vista and
that upon their return they be available to give the
Commission or the City Council a report.
Vote:
Yes: Alvarez, Baker, Carman, DeLaMata, Ramirez,
Taboada, Thomas
No: None
C. Calendar and Assignments - Chairperson Taboada ask that each
Commissioner be responsible for securing a host family for
our student exchanges.
The host family application is being revised.
D. International Friendship Festival
MSC (Ramirez/DeLaMata) Motion that while the Commission
believes that there may be merit to future funding of an
International Friendship Festival, it is not recommended at
this time due to fiscal constraints and the lack of
available staff resources to coordinate it.
Vote:
Yes: Alvarez, Baker, Carman, DeLaMata, Ramirez,
Taboada, Thomas
No: None
NEW BUSINESS
A. Council Members To Adopt A Sister City - Chairperson Taboada
presented an idea to the Commission of asking the Council
members to each adopt one of our Sister Cities. Ms. Taboada
will speak with the Mayor and Council Members concerning
this issue.
J g'~ J
REPORTS
A. Nancy Taboada - Sister Cities International Southern
California Chapter Regional Conference will be held March
25th, and 26th, 1994 at Torance, CA. More info to come.
B. Suzanne Ramirez - Suzanne asked each Commissioner to write
what they perceive their duties are and how they can achieve
them. This will be for the Commissioners Manual Suzanne is
putting together.
C. Teresa Thomas - Terry wrote two checks to the IFC, one for
$200.00 from the Souther California Sister City Association
and one for $763.47 from the US/Mexico Sister City
Association. These were for conferences we participated in.
The December meeting will be canceled due to Christmas, the next
regular meeting will be January 24, 1994.
There was a discussion of adopting Clearview Elementary School as
a workshop school and to introduce the Pen Pal Program to them.
All Commissioners were in favor of this.
Meeting adjourned at 5:55 P.M.
~
Lorraine Alexander
Secretary
/ ~~ '/
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE: 8. ~
Item 4
Meeting Date 01-4-94
RESOLUTION I? .J' ffRequesting the Sweetwater Authority
and the Otay Water District to Immediately Develop and Adopt a
Policy Providing for Priority Allocation of Water Supplies to
Qualifying Businesses within the City of Chula Vista During Times
of Drought
RESOLUTION /7..:?.5'r' Requesting the San Diego County
Water Authority to Develop and Adopt a Policy Which Provides
for Priority Allocation of Water Supplies to Those Cities
Voluntarily Implementing Water Conservation Measures
SUBMITTED BY: Community Development Director1i~
~ity Attorney ~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager 1b 7 Ii (4/Stbs Vote: Yes _ No.xl
11.JPt'
BACKGROUND: On November 9, 1993, Council directed staff to pursue development of a
policy to provide priority water allocation to qualifying industries during times of drought, in
order to insure the least possible interruption of water supplies to those industries which would
be most impacted and/or are targeted recruitment prospects. This direction stemmed from a
proposal made to the Interagency Water Task Force by Mayor Nader at their September 10
meeting. Mayor Nader suggested that eligibility criteria be established for qualifying businesses
and that the city work with the water districts to assure no net negative impact on water
availability by reducing General Plan density, with exemptions for developers independently
pursuing water conservation/availability measures.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council: 1) adopt a resolution requesting the County Water
Authority to develop and adopt a policy which provides for priority allocation of limited water
supplies to those cities voluntarily implementing water conservation measures; 2) adopt a
resolution formally requesting Chula Vista's two local water districts to immediately develop and
adopt a policy providing for priority allocation of water supplies to qualifying businesses within
the City of Chula Vista during times of drought; and 3) direct staff to identify ongoing and
potential Chula Vista programs and measures to facilitate water conservation and encourage
private development to participate in the expansion of water supplies.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: There has been no formal action by a
board or commission. However, Economic Development Commission Chairman William
Tuchscher testified at the November 9 meeting that the concept of adopting a priority allocation
policy for targeted job creating and/or revenue generating businesses is consistent with and
supportive of the EDC's goals.
17-/
Page 2, Item / '1
Meeting Date 01/04/94
DISCUSSION:
Water Conservation/Growth Management
In evaluating Council's direction, staff has identified a number of issues that need to be
addressed. In considering the potential future reduction of residential density, in particular, it
was felt that the relationship of growth management policies - as related to water conservation -
might be best addressed on a regional basis, and thus the recommendation is being made to
request the regional water authority (CW A) integrate this philosophy into their allocation
program. It is suggested that city staff work with CW A to design such a program.
Additionally, the Mayor has suggested that staff identify existing and potential growth
management and water conservation measures which could be considered in the CW A's
evaluation of the city of Chula Vista per the proposed policy. Examples might include such
measures as fixture retrofitting, water reclamation, storage enhancement by private development,
reduced General Plan residential densities, private developer contracts with water providers (as
is being evaluated by Eastlake relating to the High Tech/Biotech Zone), or development of a
desalinization assessment district.
Local Provider Water Allocation Prioritization
However, while a regional approach is desirable in terms of overall reduction of water demand
in times of both drought and nondrought, staff suggests that the local water authorities have the
legal ability to proceed to evaluate the potential for immediate policy-setting regarding allocation
of available water supplies (within Chula Vista) during drought conditions. In other words, there
is a need to evaluate how the existing limited supply is being distributed among our city's
residential and commercial uses. (For example, should job supporting uses be given priority
treatment over such things as carwashing or residential landscaping?; should qualifying
businesses be allowed a lower percentage cutback than residential?) In order to create a positive
business environment and to encourage targeted businesses to stay, expand and locate in Chula
Vista, a policy which recognizes the need to give priority of water allocation to businesses whose
operations -and hence jobs- might otherwise be threatened is desirable. This is the basis for
staff's recommendation to request that such a policy be developed by our local providers.
Water Districts' Response to Mayor and Council's Request
Subsequent to this item going to Council on November 9, the Sweetwater Authority and the Otay
Water District jointly submitted a letter to Mr. Lester Snow, General Manager of the San Diego
County Water Authority (see letter dated November 18, 1993, Attachment A) indicating that
Mayor Nader "has asked both districts to make a firm water supply commitment available to
biotech and biomed type industries..." The letter links this request to a request "by agriculture"
to reduce agricultural rates, and suggests an option to provide lower agriculture rates in
exchange for a commitment from farmers to reduce their water demand at certain times of
shortage. (This particular option is not one that has been suggested by the Chula Vista Council.)
Mr. Snow responded in a letter dated December 2, 1993 (see Attachment B) and indicates that
/9/;2.
Page 3, Item /9
Meeting Date 01104/94
the CW A staff is preparing an array of options to address the need for a firm water supply for
industrial uses "for consideration by member agencies and the Water Authority Board. " Staff
is encouraged by this response to the Mayor and Council's initiative and will be monitoring the
development of these options. However, the recommendations in this staff report reflect the
following:
[1] Specific input to CW A to incorporate individual city's efforts to adopt water
conservation measures into their analysis as one of the factors to be considered
in prioritization of water distribution; and
[2] The desirability of our local providers immediately beginning an analysis of the
feasibility of developing an industrial prioritization policy, without dependency
upon the action of other water provider agencies.
FISCAL IMPACT: An environmental assessment is anticipated to be required to accompany
the development of the recommended water policies, and could result in significant costs. The
responsible party for such costs would need to be determined. Staff time will be required to
work with the appropriate water providers to develop the respective program guidelines.
[C:\WP51\COUNCIL\1 I3S\WATER.l 13]
/7'J
..
ATTACHMENT IIAII
J'
... '~dr'dl" It: (~IlIll>d~111 ~='lIIf1'
... ~lO\JbMID. PI'I'IJ v~. CA:.1'\:llINIA.,rm
~1:'OQm N5ACOCC.,e
Novanber 18, 1993
Mr. Lester Snow
General Mlnager
San Diego County Water Authority
S211 Fifth Ave~ue
SAn Diego, CA
..~~Lj;';';':"'~i""'"
~~ ............~.:..~:. :. .-..:.
Subject::. f1rm:,&upply co~tmen( forIndustrial USQS.
Dear Mr. Snow:
The Governing Boards of Sweetwater Authority and Otay Water District have been
contacted by the Mayor of Chul. Vista regarding the avallability 01 a firm water
supply co:mnitment for czrw.n industrial uses. Mayor Nader, and perhaps other
mayors in the county, are trying to combat the current economic situation by
attracting industries that wowd provide new hJgh-payil'lg Jobs to the aNnty. Mayor
Nader has asked both districts to make . fIrm water supply coD'Unitment available to
bio-tech and blo-med type industrJes because he believes that:
1) These fndUltrles are businesses of future high growth and success;
2) The operation of this type of industry entails intensive water
requirements; and
3) Ownen of this type of business would not be Willing to move to the
county without a firm water IUpply commitment.
Recently, options for modifying agricultural rates have been disc:u.ssed. One option
wowd prov1de a Jower priced water lor agriC'Ulture in return for a commitment from
agrlC'Ultural user. to reduce their water .uppI)' upon demand. These rates attempt to
fu1fil1 the sptcW bustnesa needs of agria11tute.
There Is . .!m11arity in the request by apiculture and Mayor Nader'. request on
behalf of industry. Both requests are based on apedallntereet needs. The need to
have a firm water .uppIy is jwt u important to industrlallnterests as the neec1 for
JoWl%' costs 11 to agricultural intereata. .
~9-'I
,.
Mr. Lester Snow, General Manager
San Diego County Water Authority
November 18, 1993
Page 2
. In our opinion. the two requests complement each other. The request by agriculture
provides a greater Wlter supply available to others but alao leaves a corresponding
reduction in revenues. The request by Mayor Nader ,involvu the .upp1r of
unlnterruptible water but this could possibly be generated by restructuring
agricultural de1fvery optiON. . .
Mayor Nader has asked each of our two datricts to indjvfdually provide. for thle
need. We, however; balieve that the request could be better adminiateredat a San
Diego County Water Au"thority level U the CWA were to have luppl)' options which
met the lndustri.l as well ~the agricultural needs; revenues and demands could be
balanced morteffidently than if alhUuricts in the county attempted th~ same task
mdependentIy.
For the above reasons, the Coverning Boards. of Sweetwater Authorlty and Otay
Water District request that San Diego County Water Authority establish water supply
options (or indu.trial and asrieultural use which would incorporate I hiiher
nl1abWty to some customers in return Eor more flexible prldng options to agriculture.
We understand that such options would have to be tied to drought .tages and could
expire under very extreme drought conditions.
Sincerely,
SWEETW ATBR AUTHORITY
. dt~~
Sue ] arrett
Chairman
O~WA~DlSTRICT
'$1/~t;A
Mark Watton'-
Chairman
cc: Mayor George Waterl, City of National City
Mayor Tim Nader, Ot)' of Chula Vista ~
Cowu:ilman IAonard Moore, City of Chuta Vista
Ch~ Tri, H\&bbard, Chula Vista Interagency Wa. Task Force
Byron Buck, SaI\ Diego County Water Authority
. I .
. .
RAR:mH
~ J'j,~
DEe 0G'93 01:39PM SWEETWRTER R..ITHORITY
@ ATTACHMENT IIBII
San Diego County Wafer Authority
A Public: ~ncy
3211 Fifth Avenue · Son Diego, California 921 03-5718
(619) 682.4100 FAX (619) 297.0511
P.2
December 2, 1993
Sue Jarrett, Chairman
Sweetwater Authority
P. O. Box 2329
Chula Vista, CA 91912-2328
Mark 'Watton, Chainnan
Otay water District
10595 Jamacha Soulevard. .
Spring Valley,CA 91977
Subject; Fi~ Supply for Industrial Uses
RECEIVED
DEe 6 1193
~TH eAY
IRRlOA"ON D1smCT
.. .' ; . . ~ : -.,. I
..:.:_.~~_. ....f. ..,....._. .":.........~.. .to'-,_.-,;.. ~'.
Dear Ms. -Jar:r:ett andKr" .Watton:
I have received. and reviewed your letter of Novembtlr 1.8, 1993
regarding the concept of a fir.m supply commitment for industrial
uses. This is both an interesting and timely concept to be
considered.
:t have initiated .ome conceptual discussions regard.ing the
creation of a "highly reliable water supply' which could pro'Vide
the firm industrial eommitments to which you refer. In order to
have abetter understanding of the scope of this issue, :t have also
initiated discussions with the other Water. Authority Member
Agencies to ascertain their need for such a fir.m supply, and if it
exists, what quantities of water c1emand would likely De in this
category.
Once we hive ic1entified the potential regional needs for a
drought resistant water supply, Water Authority staff will prepare
an array of options to adc1ress such a need for consideration by
Member Agencies aDd the 'Water Authority Board. I will keep you
apprised of ourprogres8 on this matter.
ter A. Snow
General Hanager
kvb
cmrs
. .... _ . -.."w. . ....- 0.,.
. ~. '--.... DIc90
MOIl.,. MfNe1l1
1W&1ITIl!W-= --- ~
. ..... .. . ...... .., . HtIIt . o.r
. v.... ....~.
. .....-
MlINIa'IlL WMIIt DII1JlIQS
. ~ . .....
.~ ._....~
. -.ao- . ~c-
a ...... . ....
COCIH7V
. ".Ilioeo
""'~
PVIUC &mU7Y DUnIC1
.,.... .
~ otOINC\"
. ""'"'- -. ...-
PlINtlD ON IEC\"O.fg .rp
IAwrt::: ~ If-/-
~-'3
....,- I ~.f __
RESOLUTION ) 7 ..15 f
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA REQUESTING THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY
TO DEVELOP AND ADOPT A POLICY WIDCH PROVIDES FOR
PRIORITY ALLOCATION OF WATER SUPPLIES TO THOSE CITIES
VOLUNTARILY IMPLEMENTING WATER CONSERVATION
MEASURES
WHEREAS, on August 13, 1993 Mayor Nader introduced the Interagency Water
Task Force with the concept of a "Water Availability Plan for Economic Development", and
further discussions have been held with this Task Force regarding a proposal to assure qualifying
businesses an uninterrupted water supply with the intent of avoiding disruptions of existing plant
operations and potentially resulting job losses, as well as creating an incentive for new business
to locate here; and
WHEREAS, on November 9, 1993 Council directed staff to develop a policy to
provide priority water allocation to qualifying industries during times of drought in order to
insure the least possible interruption of water supplies to those industries which would be most
impacted and/or are targeted recruitment prospects; and
WHEREAS, Mayor Nader had suggested that the city work with the water
districts to assure no net negative impact on water availability by reducing General Plan density
(with exemptions for developers independently pursuing water availability measures); and
WHEREAS, the relationship of growth management policies as related to water
conservation might be best addressed on a regional basis; and
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista wishes to take a leadership role in water
conservation measures and in job retention and creation.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA does hereby fmd, order, determine and resolve that a request be made to the San
Diego County Water Authority to develop and adopt a policy which provides for priority
allocation of limited water supplies to those cities within its jurisdiction voluntarily implementing
water conservation measures.
PRESENTED BY:
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Chris Salomone
Community Development Director
~~"~ ~f.
Bruce M. Boog tl ';
City Attorney /
[C:\WP51 \COUNCll..\RESOS\W ATER-2.RES]
/94~/
RESOLUTION
/?J53
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA REQUESTING THE SWEETWATER AUTHORITY AND THE
OTAY WATER DISTRICT TO IMMEDIATELY DEVELOP AND ADOPT
A POLICY PROVIDING FOR PRIORITY ALLOCATION OF WATER
SUPPLIES TO QUALIFYING BUSINESSES WITHIN THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA DURING TIMES OF DROUGHT
WHEREAS, on August 13, 1993 Mayor Nader introduced the Interagency Water
Task Force with the concept of a "Water Availability Plan for Economic Development", and
further discussions have been held with this Task Force regarding a proposal to assure qualifying
businesses an uninterrupted water supply in order to avoid disruptions of existing plant
operations and resulting potential job losses, as well as to create an incentive for job attraction;
and
WHEREAS, on November 9, 1993 Council directed staff to develop a policy to
provide priority water allocation to qualifying industries during times of drought in order to
insure the least possible interruption of water supplies to those industries which would be most
impacted and/or are targeted recruitment prospects; and
WHEREAS, on November 18, 1993 the two local water districts jointly notified
the County Water Authority (CWA) of the Mayor's request to "make a firm water supply
commitment to biotech and biomed industries.... " and linked this request to an option to provide
lower agriculture rates in exchange for a commitment from farmers to reduce their water
demand during shortages; and
WHEREAS, the CW A has responded with a letter indicating that their staff is
preparing options to address the need for a firm water supply for industrial uses for
consideration by member agencies and the CW A board; and
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista is encouraged by the response to the Mayor
and Council's initiative to develop regionally based options, but also wishes to move ahead with
a local water policy relating to allocation of existing water supplies during times of drought,
without dependency upon the action of other agencies.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA does hereby fmd, order, determine and resolve that a formal request be made to the
city's two local water providers to immediately develop and adopt a policy providing for priority
allocation of water supplies to qualifying businesses within the City of Chula Vista during times
of drought.
PRESENTED BY:
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Chris Salomone
Community Development Director
~1;~ vlfb /Jsl:
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
[C:\WP51 \COUNCIL\RESOS\W ATER-l.RES]
)98-/
, . -------
~~~
~~
~.-....;:.-....;:.-...,.;
~ ~""""""""
................................
. - _.J
BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITIEE APPLICA nON
Please Indicate Your Interest By Checking the APprO~(s). ______.
If You Check More Than One Line, Please Prioritize Your Interest.
ellY OF
CHUlA VISTA
_ Aging (Cmsm on)
_ Appeals (Board of)
Charter Review
Child Care Cmsm
Civil Service Cmsm
--L Cultural Arts Cmsm
_ Design Review Cmsm
Economic Dev Cmsm
_ Ethics (Board of)
_ Growth Mgmt Cmsm
Human Relations Cmsm
_ Int'l Friendship Cmsm
_ Library Board of Trustees
_ Mobilehome Rent Review Cmsm
_ Otay Valley Proj Area Cmt
Parks & Rec Cmsm
_ Planning Cmsm
Resource Consev Cmsm
_ Safety Cmsm
Southwest PAC Cmt
_ Town Centre Prj Area Cmt
~ - CV~
----=4~ ~
-<tt1tited Nations toy Cmt
----no
--n"l~eranaffair~
~HERd- ~
V')r- <
O:t>< -0 . f'T1
-n<:
:!!v;. w C
("') - . (.,j
rnl> U1
PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY
NAME:
Jorge F. Castillo
HOME ADDRESS:
RES PHONE #: 425-9740
70 Fourth Ave. #B
CITY: Chula Vista
ZIP: 91910
BUS PHONE #: 691-5174
REGISTERED VOTER IN CHULA VISTA: yes
YES
NO
DO YOU LIVE WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF CHULA VISTA'? X
YES
HOW LONG? 6 years
NO
.Vouth COOIwi....QoD Applicants ONLY: School Atteadi.u2
Grade:
COLLEGES ATTENDED & DEGREES HELD:
University of Texas at El Paso , Bachelors Degree
in Music (BM)
PRESENT EMPLOYER: ~hula Vista Public Library
PosnnON: Librarian Branch Mngr.
WHAT ARE YOUR PRINCIPAL AREAS OF INTEREST IN OUR CITY GOVERNMENT AND WHAT EXPERIENCE(S) OR
SPECIAL KNOWLEDGE CAN YOU YOU BRING TO THOSE AREAS? The areas of Public and Cultural service
As branch manager in the library, I have been involved in promoting both culture and public
services for seven years. Also my musical back2rond has been an important factor.
WHAT WOULD YOU HOPE TO ACCOMPLISH BY YOUR PARTICIPATION?
To make my collaboration
usefull to the grouth of the city where my family also lives.
._. I am familiar with the responsibilities assigned to th Board/Commission/Cumminee on which I wish to serve.
SIGNATURE
/;ll! r3
/OATE
. . . PLEASE SEE THE REVERSE SIDE OF Tl
.... FOR VERY IMPORTANT LEGAL IJIoo'FORMATION...
c2r2b - /
...--._^
TInS PAGE BlANK.
-
-,
_~c1b ~c2 )
A RESPONSE TO MURDER
On July 1, 1992, Mike Reynolds lost his daughter, Kimber Reynolds, to the bullet of
a paroled felon. On that night, a movement was born that will change the way in which
society deals with violent repeat offenders.
Until that moment, Mike Reynolds lived a simple life. A commercial photographer
by profession, he photographed over 100 weddings each year. His family lived the
American dream~ a mother who is a registered nurse, a son in the final years of law school,
another son planning a career in sports as a coach, and Kimber, the sparkle that will never
die, attending a premier fashion design school in Southern California.
Holidays and family gatherings were especially fun for this family in love with life,
and were a time for reunion and for sharing experiences. Much of this was taken away on
that fatal night on that Fresno street. But Mike Reynolds' spirit emerged from the tragedy
stiffened by the resolve to prevent other fathers and families from suffering so severe a
loss.
Appalled by a criminal justice system that turns violent felons loose on society, Mike
Reynolds wondered, "why must vicious predators go in and out of a revolving door prison
system? Why aren't they kept behind bars, where they can no longer threaten our safety?"
Having been told, "it's the law," he determined to change the law. He assembled a group
of concerned citizens, politicians, and judges to create a bill to present to the State
Legislature. Identical to the three-strikes initiative, this bill, dubbed AB-971, was killed,
ironically, by the State Assembly Public Safety Committee.
Reynolds turned to the initiative process, which gives the voters the power to secure
the safety that the legislature refused to provide. With the help of the Attorney General,
the THREE STRIKES AND YOU'RE OUT initiative was born.
The initiative represents the courage, determination, and aspirations propelling Mike
Reynolds and all others who endeavor to strengthen society's resistance to the merciless
onslaught of brutality and violence. Violent repeat felons bear the brunt of the blame "for
the deterioration in the quality of life in this state. This initiative will spearhead the assault
on violent crime. So much is at stake~ our efforts to regain control of our streets and
neighborhoods must not fail.
Mike has dedicated this initiative to his slain daughter, Kimber, and to the thousands
of people who in the future will not be victims of vicious crimes, because repeat felons will
be where they belong: in prison, and out of the reach of the law abiding citizens on whom
they prey.
c2C:< 01- /
Initiative
would up
sentences
By Gene Garaygordobll
Times-Delta
Mike Reynolds admitted he
wasn't much of a public speak-
er as he addressed the County
Center Rotary Club Tuesday.
"I'm just a dad whose
daughter was killed in a very
violent way," Reynolds said.
It was that tragedy that has
led the Fresno wedding photog-
rapher to direct a statewide
initiative that, if enacted,
would double or triple prison
sentences for violent repeat of-
fenders. The measure, which
needs 380,000 signatures to be
placed on the November 1994
ballot, would also require a 25-
year-to-life term for serious or
violent offenders convicted a
third time.
Legislation, similar to the
proposed initiative, stalled in
the state Assembly earlier this
year.
The proposal comes at a
time when law enforcement of-
ficials nationwide are seeking
alternatives to putting drug of-
fenders in prison - leaving
that option for hard-core crimi-
nals.
Kimber Reynolds was only
18 when she was gunned down
last year outside a restaurant
in Fresno's trendy Tower Dis-
trict. At the time, the man who
reportedly pulled the trigger,
Joe Davis, and his accomplice
Douglas Walker, were on a vio-
lent crime spree.
Both had served time in pris-
on. Walker, a heroin addict
since age 11, had been out of
prison only two months when
the shooting occurred.
Kimber and a friend decided
to have dessert on June 30,
1992, and were leaving a res-
taurant when the two men
drove up on a stolen motorcy-
cle. Davis reportedly tried to
take Kimber's purse. When she
tried to pull it away from Da-
vis, he pulled out a .357-caliber
Magnum handgun, pointed it
at her ear and fired.
"She stayed alive for 26
hours, in a coma," Reynolds
said softly.
With few clues to the killers'
identities, Mike Reynolds went
on a Fresno radio talk show
with his story.
_ HoI-wr......OeI1a
would triple sentences for repeat violent offend-
ers. Reynolds' daughter was a murder victim.
A father's mission - Mike Reynolds of Fresno
holds up a copy of a victims' rights initiative that
About 24 hours after the
broadcast, the killers had been
identified, Reynolds said.
When police surrounded Davis'
home, he chose to shoot it out
with police.
"[Davis] had 52 bullet holes
in him, and he still lived for 15
minutes," Reynolds said.
"Rarely is justice served out
so quickly in this state."
Reynolds said he believes
the initiative - titled "The
Three Strikes and You're Out
Statute" - will provide justice
to violent crime victims.
A cost impact study is being
conducted by the Secretary 01'
State's Office.
Petitions should be in San
Joaquin Valley communities
within 70 days, Reynolds said.
Kimber Reynolds
killed in Tower District
~~~
c2d.- c/ - r2
Repeat Offender Law
Summary of the proposed Violent
Repeal or Habitual Offender Law, IIlso
known as the "Three Strikes and You're
Out Stalute:"
. First felony conviction would result
in the sentence required by law.
.Second felony conviction would
result in two times the sentence
nlCOlTlmended .
.Third felony conviction would result
in three times the sentence
nlCOlTlmended.
There would be an exception if any of
the convictions were serious or violent
felonies. The third conviclion in that case
would carry a penally of 25 ye.rs to life.
The law would apply to and include
juvenile oftenders over the age of 16.
If a gun was used in commission of
any one felony, a term of 25 years to life
would be automatically required.
The measure would reduce good
limelwork time cred"s given to prisoners
from 50 pen:enlto 20 pen:enl.
Reprinted/rom the Visa/ill Times-Delt/l
Wednesd/ly, August J8, Jf)fJJ
LOS ANGEU.S TIMES
* nruRSDA Y, DECEMBER 9, 1993 A3
CAPITOL JOURNAL
GEORGE SKELTON
A Father's
Crusade Born
From Pain
SACRAMENTO
Before Polly Klaas, there was Kimber
Reynolds. Different crime, same
result: random murder, generating
public rage of sufficient force to propel
politicians.
Kimber Reynolds, as with Polly Klaas,
was the kind of daughter who would make
any parent proud-and, similarly, one whom
workaday, law-abiding people everywhere
could relate to as one of their own.
"She was the All-American girl," recalls
her brother, Michael Brian Reynolds, 24, a
UCLA Law School student. Kimber was 18,
bright and beautiful with long blonde hair.
She had worked in a Baskin-Robbins, been
elected president of her high school senate,
been on the varsity tennis team and gotten
good grades. She was a student at the Los
Angeles Fashion Institute of Design and
Merchandising, but the big city isn't where
she was murdered.
Like 12-year-old Polly, who was snatched
from her bedroom during a slumber party in
small- town Petaluma, Kimber fell victim to
a habitual criminal in a presumed safety
zone. She had returned to her hometown of
Fresno to be a bridesmaid in a wedding.
With a male friend, she had gone for dinner
to a trendy restaurant-one of those Art
Deco places with full windows on the
street-and was getting back into her car
parked just out front when two guys
wheeled up on a stolen motorcycle. One
grabbed for her purse.
Kimber's father, Mike Reynolds, 49, tells
what happened next:
"She resisted, but not that much. It wasn't
a big struggle. He pulled a .357 magnum out
of his waistband, stuck it in her ear and
pulled the trigger. . . . There must have
been 24 witnesses. . . . They didn't even
take her purse."
o
That was June 29 of last year. Mike
Reynolds, a portrait photographer whose
wife is a nurse, was awakened from a sound
sleep and told that their youngest
child-their only daughter-had been shot.
She died 26 hours later.
:<:2 oI~.3
What Reynolds did next was the first of
his many moves that have influenced events
and altered the political landscape, and
ultimately could shift public policy. He went
on local talk radio. "It's the toughest thing
I've ever done," he recalls. But by the end of
the show, an informant had phoned in the
identity of the triggerman and then helped
police locate him in an apartment.
The killer came out shooting. He took 10
bullets and pellets from four shotgun blasts,
52 entry wounds in all. His mother placed
the body in an open casket without makeup
for the wounds. "I just wanted to give his
friends a message," she said. "I wanted
others to know what happens when you
abuse drugs, when you get involved in
crime."
The 25-year-old man was described by
police as a hard-core user of
methamphetamine who frequently had been
jailed on gun and drug charges and only two
months earlier had been released from state
prison after serving time for auto theft.
Besides Kimber's murder, he was wanted for
a series of robberies and assaults.
Says Reynolds: "When they pulled the
h~ndle on that piece of human waste, half of
Fresno did high-fives."
Coincidently, Kimber's killer and Polly's
accused murderer had the same last
name-Davis. Joe Davis murdered Kimber.
His accomplice was Douglas Walker, 27,
who had a long rap sheet for narcotics and
petty theft. He pleaded guilty to robbery and
accessory to murder. The sentence was nine
years, meaning he'll probably be out in half
that time on good behavior.
"He's in an air-conditioned prison with
three hots and a tub," Reynolds says. "This
week, I've got to figure out how to pay my
property taxes. It makes you sick."
o
Reynolds is the rare kind of citizen that
politicians dread or relish, view as a
nuisance or a boon, depending on their
needs. But virtually all respect the type.
A man with the look of perpetual pain,
Reynolds is articulate, energetic, committed
and street smart. And he is the driving force
behind a proposed ballot initiative that
Califotnia voters will be reading a lot about.
Titled "Three Strikes and You're Out"-a
name borrowed from a Washington state
initiative that passed last month by 3 to
I-the measure is aimed at keeping violent
criminals off the street. A felon's second
sentence would be twice the normal time. A
third conviction would result in triple time,
or 25 years to life, whichever was greater.
Reynolds struck out trying to push his
measure through the Assembly Public
Safety Committee, one of the Legislature's
last vestiges of 1970s liberalism. But state
politicians have been jumping in with
endorsements, especially since Polly Klaas'
murder.
The Fresno father is circulating initiative
petitions and has a toll-free nurr.ber:
I-BOO-CONVICT. "We tried to get
PIRTBAG," he says, "but that turned out to
be a vacuum cleaner."
Gunlflan Kills Four in N. r: Commuter Train/see Below
~au ;J~~~~"~,~!~""g~r.uictt
***
41S-777-1111 so CENTS
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 8, 1993
8 Charges in Polly Case
Suspect Faces Death Penalty
More than 200 people, including Bill Ma.hek and .on Rhody (right), waited in Petaluma to .ign petition. for tougher .entence.
[0' LOCK 'EM UP, TOSS THE KEY
Behind the Nationwide Move
To Keep Repeaters in Prison
BII Rellnolds Holdtng
Chronicle Legal ~,... Wrlter
Mike Reynolds lost bls 18- ifornla residents galvanized by
year-old daughter Kimber a the slaying of Polly Klaas. It is an
year ago last June when two ca- initiative to keep repeat offend-
reer thieves, thugs and drug ad- ers like Klaas' confessed killer be-
diets shot her tbrough the head hind bars, the latest in a series of
outside Fresno's Dally Planet such proposals emerging
restaurant. He cried, he prayed throughout the country.
- and then he "promised to go Supporters say the laws will
~fter I.'eople ~!ke these dirt bags reduce crime, citing studies that
10 a bIg way. show that most violent crimes
The fruit of Reynolds' prom-
ise is now circulating among Cal- PRISONS: Page A12 Col. 1
Davis Smirks in Court, But
Lawyer Says He's Remorseful
BII Ron Soneuhtne and Dan Reed
ClarorUcJe CoITe.ponde"e.
The confessed murder-kid-
naper of PoIly Klaas was for-
maIly arraigned yesterday on
an eight-count complaint that
eould mean the death penalty
If he Is convicted.
Richard Allen Davis, who was
shackled at the waist and closely
guarded by sheriff's deputies, ap-
peared unfazed and even smirk-
ed at one point as Sonoma Coun-
ty Municipal Court Judge Robert
Dale read the charges: murder,
kidnap, robbery, residential bur-
glary, two counts of felony as-
sault and two counts of false im-
prisonment.
Flanked by his attorney, Dep-
uty Public Defender Bruce Kin-
nison, Davis nodded and mum-
bled when the judge asked if he
understood the charges.
The 39-year-Old parolee was
ordered held without bail and
will he back in court December
28 to enter pleas and to have a
date set for a preliminary hear-
ing of the prosecution's evidence
SUSPECT: Page A13 Col. 5
02:<01 'I
Signature Gathering Instructions
1. If you have not already signed a petition yourself, please fill out space #1
completely. Print your name and residence address, with the city and zip code.
Sign your name as you are registered to vote. If you have moved since you last
voted, you must re-register before you sign. You may only sign one petition as a
petitioner. Have someone else use space #1 on subsequent petitions you circulate.
There is no limit to the number of petitions you circulate.
2. Have your friends, family members, and neighbors that are registered to vote
complete and sign the numbered spaces as they are registered.
3. All of the signatures must be from the same county on anyone petition sheet. It
is important that you do not co-mingle counties on anyone form. Any voter from
any county can sign, but they need to sign on separate forms for each county. Don't
worry about wasting paper. If someone from a remote county wants to sign, get
their signature. Over half a million signatures are required to place this issue on the
ballot, so every signature counts!
4. Important! When you are done with a petition form, whether it is filled with
signatures or your signature is the only one on it, you need to completely fill out the
Declaration of Circulator at the bottom of the page. If this portion of the petition is
not filled out, all of the signatures above it will be invalid. The person filling out the
declaration is supposed to be the person that actually saw the signatures being placed
on the petition. If you are the only one who signed the petition, then that person is
you. Check to see that each space is filled out and easy to read. The dates must
reflect the actual dates you circulated the petition. (If all signatures are obtained on
the same day, that date must appear in all three date spaces.) Make sure you sign the
declaration as you are registered to vote. Remember, there is no limit to the number
of petitions you circulate.
5. Now that you are an expert petition circulator, pass your knowledge on to a
friend or relative and make sure they have plenty of petitions. Also, be certain you
get these signatures to your volunteer coordinator or to the THREE STRIKES AND
YOU'RE OUT Committee as soon as possible. Please don't wait until the last minute
to turn your signatures over. Thank you for all of your help--we couldn't do it
without you. You have truly been a part of democracy in action and will help save
law-abiding Californians from being victimized by repeat, violent felons.
3 STRIKES AND YOU'RE OUT
20 West Shaw Avenue
Fresno, CA 93704
For additional petitions, please call (209) 227-5676 or 1-800-CONVICT (1-800-266-
8428). ;2.;2 -cl-3
December, 1993
3 STRIKES AND
YOU~RE OUT
A MEASURE TO K.EEP
VIOLENT REPEAT FELONS
IN PRISON - ON THE
NOV. 1994 BALLOT
Dear Supporter:
305 E. Harvard, Fre8Do, t:A 93'704
1-800-t:ONVlcr. FAX (209) 221-0288
Please accept my sincerest thanks for your support of our
initiative to get repeat violent offenders off our streets and into
prison where they belong. The recent show of support has been
overwhelming. We have been making great strides through
what has been largely a volunteer effort.
However, I must tell you that our little budget is being
taxed to the limit. Just the postage for this most recent mailing
of petitions to volunteers like you will cost us thousands of
dollars. I hate to ask for money, but we also need your help, if
possible, with checks for $10, $20, or $30. These kinds of
donations from my friends and neighbors here in the Fresno area
have kept us going so far.
Please make any checks out to 3 STRIKES AND YOU'RE
OUT, 20 West Shaw Ave., Fresno, CA 93704. Thank you
again for your support and encouragement.
c2 e2 c(J- ~
P.S. - Please return your signed petitions with the "Circulator"
section at the bottom completely filled out as soon as possible!
Name
Address
City, State, Zip
PLEASE
PLACE
29rt STAMP
HERE
3 STRIKES AND YOU IRE OUT
305 East Harvard
Fresno, CA 93704
Fold This Side Out
--------------------------------------------------------------
PLEASE ASK YOUR NEIGHBORS AND FRIENDS
TO SIGN BEFORE YOU SEND IN THE PETITION.
INSTRUCTIONS:
All signers on one petition must be
registered to vote in the same county.
Petition circulator must complete and
sign both line 1 and the Declaration of
Circulator. Use an ink pen only.
DO NOT CUT the petition! Fold and mail
entire four pages or signatures will be
invalid. Fold twice so mailing address
shows, and staple or tape closed.
Thank you! c22. c1- ~
Mike Reynolds:
Yes! I want to help get repeat
felons off the street and behind
bars. Laws without penalties are
no laws at all. I have enclosed
my signed petition together with
my largest possible contribution:
D $10 0 $25 D $50
D Other
Please make your check payable to:
3 Strikes and You're Out Committee
Contributions are not tax deductible
for federal tax purposes.
For additional petitions or
to volunteer, please call
209-227-5676 or
1-800-CONVICT
INITIATIVE MEASURE TO BE SUBMITTED DIRECfL Y TO THE VOTERS
The Attorney General of California has prepared the following title and summary of the chief purposes and points
of the proposed measure:
SENTENCE ENHANCEMENT. REPEAT OFFENDERS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
Provides increased sentences for convicted felons who have previously been convicted of violent or serious
felonies such as murder, mayhem or rape. Convicted felons with one prior conviction would receive twice the
normal sentence for the new offense. Convicted felons with two or more prior convictions would receive three
times the normal sentence for the new offense or 25 years to life, whichever is greater. Includes as prior
convictions certain felonies committed by juveniles over 16 years of age. Reduces sentence reduction credit which
may be earned by these convicted felons. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of
fiscal impact on state and local governments: Annual and one time costs to the state of several billions of dollars
would be incurred as a result of additional and longer state prison commitments; some savings to local government
in an unknown amount would result from the shifting of sentenced offenders from local to state responsibility and
fewer prosecutions of repeat offenders.
To the HODorable Secretary of State of California:
We, the undersigned, registered, qualified voters of California, resideDts of CoUDty or City and CouDty, hereby propose ameDdmeDts to the
Penal Code, relating to prisoD seDteDces for those who commit a feloDY and have beeD previously coDvicted of serious and/or violeDt feloDY offenses, and petitioD the Secretary of State to submit
the same to the voters of California for their adoptioD or rejectioD at the Dext succeediDg geDeral electioD or at any special statewide electioD held prior to the general electioD or otherwise
provided by law. The proposed statutory ameDdmeDts read as follows:
It is the inteDt of the People of the State of California in eDactiDg this measure to ensure lODger priSOD seDteDces and greater punishmeDt for those who commit a feloDY and have beeD previously
coDvicted of serious and/or violeDt feloDY offenses.
SECflON 1. SectioD 1110.12 is added to the PeDal Code, to read:
1110.12 (a) Notwithstanding any other law, if a defeDdant bas beeD coDvicted of a feloDY and it bas beeD pled aDd proved that the defeDdant bas ODe or more prior feloDY coDvictions as defined
iD [proposed] California PeDal Code SectioD 1110.12 (b), the court shall adhere to each of the following:
(1) There shall Dot be an aggregate term limitatioD for purposes of consecutive seDteDciDg for aDY subsequeDt feloDY coDvictioD.
(2) ProbatioD for the curreDt offense shall DOt be granted, Dor shall execution or impositioD of the seDteDce be SUSpeDded for any prior offense.
(3) The leDgth of time betweeD the prior feloDY convictioD and the curreDt feloDY coDvictioD shall Dot affect the impositioD of seDtence.
(4) There shall Dot be a commitmeDt to any other facUity other than State PrisoD. DiversioD shall not be graDted nor shall the defeDdant be eligible for commitmeDt to the California
RehabilitatioD CeDter as provided iD Article 2 (commeDcing with Section 3050) of Chapter 1 of Division 3 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.
(5) The total amouDt of credits awarded pursuant to Article 2.5 (commeDcing with SectiOD 2930) of Chapter 1 of Tide 1 of Part 3 shall Dot exceed ODe-fifth (115) of the total term of
imprisonmeDt imposed aDd shall DOt accrue until the defeDdaDt is physically placed iD the State PrisoD.
(6) If there is a curreDt coDvictioD for more thaD ODe (1) feloDY COUDt Dot committed OD the same occasioD, aDd DOt arisiDg from the same set of operative facts, the court shall seDteDce the
defeDdant consecutively OD each count pursuant to this sectioD.
(1) If there is a curreDt convictioD for more thaD ODe serious or violeDt feloDY as described iD 1110.12(aX6). the court shall impose the seDteDce for each coDvictioD consecutive to the
seDteDce for any other coDvictioD for which the defeDdaDt may be consecutively seDteDced iD the maDDer prescribed by law.
(8) Any seDteDce imposed pursuant to this sectioD will be imposed CODsecutive to any other seDteDce which the defeDdaDt is already serviDg, unless otherwise provided by law.
(b) NotwithstaDding any other provisioD of law and for the purposes of this sectiOD, a prior coDvictioD of a feloDY shall be defiDed as:
(1) Any offense defiDed iD California PeDal Code SectiOD 661.5(c) as a violeDt feloDY or any offense defined in California PeDal Code SectioD 1192.1(c) as a serious feloDY in this state. The
determinatioD of whether a prior coDvictioD is a prior feloDY coDvictioD for purposes of this sectioD shall be made UpoD the date of that prior coDviction and is DOt affected by the seDteDce
imposed uDless the senteDce automatically, UpoD the iDitial seDtenciDg, CODverts the feloDY to a misdemeaDor. NODe of the followiDg dispositions shall affect the determiDatioD that a prior
coDvictioD is a prior feloDY for purposes of this sectiOD:
(A) The suspensioD of impositioD of judgmeDt or senteDce.
(B) The stay of executioD of seDtence.
(C) The commitmeDt to the State DepartmeDt of Health Services as a meDtally disordered sex offeDder followiDg a conviction of a felony.
(D) The commitment to the California Rehabilitation Center or any other facility whose fUDction is rehabilitative diversion from State Prison.
(2) A conviction in another jurisdiction for an offense thaI, if commi\led in California, is punishable by imprisoDment in State Prison. A prior conviction of a particular felony shall
include a convictioD in another jurisdiction for an offense that iDcludes all of the elements of the particular felony as defined in California PeDal Code SectioD 661.5( c) or California Penal
Code SectioD 1192.1(c).
(3) A prior juvenile adjudication shall constitute a prior feloDY coDvictioD for purposes of sentence enhancement if:
(A) The juveDile was sixteen (16) years of age or older at the time he or she committed the prior offense, and
(B) The prior offeDse is
(i) listed in subdivisioD (b) of Section 101 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, or
(ii) listed iD Section 1110.12(b) as a feloDY, and
(C) The juvenile was found to be a fit and proper subject to be dealt with under juvenile court law, and
(D) The juvenile was adjudged a ward of the juveDile court within the meaning of SectioD 602 of the Welfare and Institutions Code because the persoD commi\led an offense listed iD
subdivision (b) of Section 101 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.
(c) For purposes of Ibis sectioD, and in additioD to aDY other enhaDcemeDts or punishment provisions which may apply, the following shall apply where a defeDdant has a prior feloDY
coDvictioD:
(1) If a defendant has one prior feloDY coDvictioD that bas beeD pled and proved. the determiDate term or minimum term for aD iDdeterminate term shall be twice the term otherwise
provided as punishmeDt for the curreDt feloDY coDvictioD.
(2) (A) If a defeDdant has two (2) or more prior feloDY coDvictions as defiDed in Penal Code SectioD 1110.12(bX1) that have beeD pled and proved. the term for thecurreDt feloDY
coDvictioD shall be an iDdeterminate term of life imprisoDment with a minimum term of the iDdeterminate seDtence calculated as the greater of
(i) three (3) times the term otherwise provided as punishmeDt for each current felony convictioD subsequent to the two or more prior feloDY coDvictions, or
(ii) twenty-five (25) years, or
(Hi) the term determiDed by the court pursuant to California Penal Code Section 1110 for the underlying conviction, including any enhaDcemeDt applicable under Chapter 4.5
(commencing with California Penal Code Section 1110) of Tide 1 of Part 2, or any period prescribed by California PeDal Code SectiOD 190 or 3046.
(B) The indetermiDate term described in PeDal Code SectioD 1110.12(cX2)0.) shall be served consecutive to any other term of imprisonmeDt for which a consecutive term may be
imposed by law. Any other term imposed subsequent to any indeterminate term described in Penal Code 1110.12(c) (2) Vi) shall not be merged therein but shall commeDce at the time the
persoD would otherwise have beeD released from prison.
(d) (1) NotwithstaDding any other law, this section shall be applied iD every case in which a defendant has a prior felony CODvictioD as defined in this statute. The prosecutiDg attorney shall
plead and prove each prior felony convictioD except as provided in paragraph (2). . .
(2) The prosecuting a\lorney may move to dismiss or strike a prior feloDY conviction allegation in the furtherance of justice pursuaDt to California Penal Code SectioD 1385, or if there IS
insufficieDt evideDce to prove the prior conviction. If upon the satisfactioD of the court that there is insufficient evidence to prove the prior feloDY coDvictioD, the court may dismiss or strike
the allegation. .
(e) Prior feloDY coDvictions shall not be used iD plea ~argaining as de~n~ iD California.Penal Code ~i?n 1192.1<."). The prosecuti?D s~1 pl~ and prove all known pnor felony ')?" a
coDvictions and shall DOt enter into any agreemeDt to strike or seek the dlSmlSS8l of any pnor felony convIctIon allegalloD except as proVIded In SectIOD 1110.12( d) (2). e:;?. ()If. q' {
SECflON 2. All references to existing statutes are to statutes as they existed OD JUDe 30, 1993.
SECflON 3. If any provisioD of this act or the applicatioD thereof to any person or circumstances is held invalid, that iDvalidity shall Dot affect other provisions or applications of the act
which can be given effect without the invalid provisioD or application, and to this end the provisions of this act a~e severable. ..'
SECTION 4. The provisions of this measure shall not be ameDded by the Legislature except by statute passed ID each house by roll call vote eDtered ID the JOurnal, two-thirds (2/3) of the
membership CODcurring. or by a statute that becomes effective only when approved by the electors.
INITIATIVE MEASURE TO BE SUBMITTED DIRECTLY TO THE VOTERS
The Attorney General Of California has prepared the following title and summary of the chief purposes and points
of the proposed measure:
SENTENCE ENHANCEMENT. REPEAT OFFENDERS. INITIATIVE STATUTE. Provides increased
sentences for convicted felons who have previously been convicted of violent or serious felonies such as murder,
mayhem or rape. Convicted felons with one prior conviction would receive twice the normal sentence for the new
offense. Convicted felons with two or more prior convictions would receive three times the normal sentence for
the new offense or 25 years to life, whichever is greater. Includes as prior convictions certain felonies committed
by juveniles over 16 years of age. Reduces sentence reduction credit which may be earned by these convicted
felons. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local
governments: Annual and one time costs to the state of several billions of dollars would be incurred as a result of
additional and longer state prison commitments; some savings to local government in an unknown amount would
result from the shifting of sentenced offenders from local to state responsibility and fewer prosecutions of repeat
offenders. NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
THIS PETITION MAY BE CIRCULATED BY A PAID SIGNATURE GATHERER OR A VOLUNTEER.
YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO ASK. This column for
IMPORTANT: All areas in red must be completed and signed in ink in yoU/'own hand writing. official use only
. ~1. Print Your Residence
Name: Address ONLY:
Your Signature as
Registered to Vote: City: Zip:
2. Print Your Residence
Name: Address ONLY:
Your Signature as
Registered to Vote: City: Zip:
3. Print Your Residence
Name Address ONLY:
Your Signature as
Registered to Vote: City: Zip:
4. Print Your Residence
Name: Address ONLY:
Your Signature as
Registered to Vote: City: Zip:
s. Print Your Residence
Name: Address ONLY:
II Your Signature as
Registered to Vote: City: Zip:
DECLARATION QF CIRCULATO~
(to be completed after above sIgnatures have been obtamed
I,I\'fl\lgijf1tl\ft[0i}'J~~!,f'!!:~~i\!I!,lsl!tiflll!1!lifl!!!iiiillii!, am registered to vote in the County (or City and County) of
My residence address is
. " . . ress, Cl , S a e, ZlP.
I ~lfcul~~ed t.hls sectIon of the ~tItIon a~d saw eac~ of the appended signatures being written. Each signature on
thIS petItIon. IS to the best ~f my mformatIon and .bebef, the genuine signature of the person whose name it purports
to be. All SIgnatures on thIS document were obtamed between the dates and litE/It':' ,
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the fole~~[ng is true andn&>r:lcr~ar
Executed on at
~ ~ ~&~
URGENT: All signatures invalid if you fail to sign as circulator!
'<:2. e(-/P