HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 1991/08/13
,
III declare un,ler pena:tv of pcr;ury that I a",
crn:)!oycr] by the (;ity 0" Ct~rjj-3 \n~j':a in thn
\)~ncc of '-d-le ;~~i't</ C:i~.]r;i. :":n~l t>~:,;'-~: ~ r-;,c::r::nd
t~'its }\::.cn:::..1j:\G-~.i:() c:n ':-:~':c t:i::;,:U',~;1 L>:::Jrd ;Jt
Council Chambers
Public Services Building
Tuesday, August 13, 1991
6:00 p.m.
Resnllar MeetinS1: of the City of Chula Vista City Council
CALLED TO ORDER
1.
CAIJ... TIlE ROll.:
Councilmembers Grasser Horton -' Malcolm _, Moore -' Rindone -'
and Mayor Nader _'
2. PLEDGE OF AllEGIANCE TO TIlE FLAG. SILENT PRAYER
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: July 8, July 30, 1991 and August 6, 1991.
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF TIlE DAY:
a. Proclaiming Sunday, August 18, 1991 as -Chula Vista Public Library Day" - Proclamation
will be read by Mayor Nader and officially presented during the activities on August 18th.
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items 5 through 12)
The staffrecommendations 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 public or City 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 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.) Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be discussed after Public Hearings and Oral
Communications. Items pulled by the public will be the first items of business.
5. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
a. Letter of resignation: Joel Kodicek, Youth Commission Vice Chair; and Lupe M. Jimenez,
Growth Management Commission. Staff recommends that the letters of resignation be
accepted with regret and letters of appreciation be sent to Mr. Kodicek and Ms. Jimenez.
b. Petition protesting unfavorable conditions at Hilltop Park - Hilltop Park Neighborhood
Coalition, Eugene A. Otto, 83 Millan Ct., Chula Vista, CA 91910. Staff recommends that a
meeting be scheduled with the Police Department, Parks and Recreation Department, and
residents of the neighborhood.
c. Letter requesting the establishment of a system of voluntary patrols of reservists for the
business districts - Russell Jack Taylor, President, Chula Vista TV & Hi-Fi Center, Inc., 695
Third Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910.
Agenda
-2-
August 13, 1991
6. ORDINANCE 2473 AMENDING SUBSECTION (A) -CRIMINAL PENALTIES- OF SECTION
9.20.050 -PENALTIES FOR VIOlATION OF <J-IAPTER- OF CHAPTER 9.20
-PROPERrr DEFACEMENT" OF TIlE MUNIOPAL CODE TO PROVIDE FOR
AN ENFORCEMENT POUCY FOR WRONGFUL DISPlAY OF AEROSOL
PAINT CONTAINERS AND FELT TIP MARKERS (second readinS!: and
adoption) - At the 7/23/91 Council meeting, the City Attorney was directed
to prepare an enforcement policy conditioned on providing general notice
to the business community and specific notice of a violation, prior to
commencement of criminal prosecution. Staff recommends Council place
ordinance on second reading and adoption. (City Attorney)
7. ORDINANCE 2474 AMENDING SECTION 1.20.010 OF TI-IE CHlll.A VISTA MUNIOPAL CODE
RElATING TO PENALrr PROVISIONS (first readinS!:) - The Municipal Code
Section 1.20.010 provides for penalties for an infraction of up to $500.
This conflicts both with State law and City Charter, both of which limit the
penalty for an infraction to $250. In order to make the Municipal Code
compatible, both with the Charter and State law, Section 1.20.010 should
be amended. Staff recommends Council place ordinance on first reading.
(City Attorney)
8. RESOLlITION 16293 AUTIlORIZING TIlE SALE OF SURPLUS PATROL VEI-llCLES TO TIlE a1Y
OF TIJUANA - The Municipal Code authorizes the Council to transfer or
sell surplus City property to the City of Tijuana. Tijuana has a need for
patrol vehicles and has submitted an offer for twenty-one (21) surplus
patrol vehicles. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of
Finance)
9A RESOLlITION 16294 APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH NATIONAL orr FOR USE OF CHlll.A
VISTA ANIMAL SHELTER - Chula Vista provides animal shelter services for
the cities of National City and Imperial Beach. These agreements are being
renewed to continue providing this service for Fiscal Year 1991-92. Staff
recommends approval of the resolution. (Chief of Police)
B. RESOLlITION 16295 APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH IMPERIAL BEACH FOR USE OF CHlll.A
VISTA ANIMAL SHELTER - Staff recommends approval of the resolution.
(Chief of Police)
lOA RESOLlITION 16296 APPROVING AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH TIlE orr OF
NATIONAL orr FOR FIRE DISPATCHING SERVICES - Chula Vista
currently has contracts with the cities of National City and Imperial Beach
to provide fire dispatching services. The rates for this service are revised
each year to reflect increased salary and support costs. Staff recommends
approval of the resolution. (Chief of Police)
B. RESOLlITION 16297 APPROVING AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH TIlE orr OF
IMPERIAL BEACH FOR FIRE DISPATCHING SERVICES - Staff recommends
approval of the resolution. (Chief of Police)
Agenda
-3-
August 13, 1991
11. RESOLUTION 16298 SUPPORTING CI1Y OF SAN DIEGO'S EFFORT TO SEEK LEGISLATIVE
REMEDIES TO AVOID CONVERTING POINT LaMA SEWAGE TREATMENf
PLANT FROM PRIMARY TO CONVENTIONAL SECONDARY AND
AGREEING TO SHARE IN THE COST - Chula Vista has been represented
on the Clean Water Governance Advisory Group (GAG) since early 1990.
The City's Representative is Councilman Moore. The purpose is to advise
the City Council of San Diego on how the participating agencies want
Metro II (The Sewer Upgrade Program) to be managed, owned, and
financed. The report will give the Council a status report and make a
recommendation on whether Chula Vista should approve of San Diego
seeking relief from converting Point Loma from its current treatment
process of Advanced Primary (Approximately 75% Removal of Solids) to
Secondary (Approximately 85% to 90% Removal of Solids). Staff
recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
12.A. RESOLUTION 16299 APPROVING UNCONTROLLED EMBANKMENT AGREEMENT FOR FILL AT
366 SURREY DRIVE - Wadie P. Deddeh and Katsumi J. Takashima have
requested permission for an uncontrolled embankment at 366 and 368
Surrey Drive. According to Section 15.04.285 of the Municipal Code, all
uncontrolled embankment agreements must be approved by Council prior
to issuance of the grading permit. Staff recommends approval of the
resolutions. (Director of Public Works)
B. RESOLUTION 16300 APPROVING UNCONTROLLED EMBANKMENT AGREEMENT FOR FILL AT
368 SURREY DRIVE
* * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * *
PUBUC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
The following items have been advertised and/or posted as publU: hearings as required by law. If you wish to speak
to any item, please fill out the -Request to Speak Formn 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
13. PUBUC HEARING REGARDING RATE INCREASE REQUESTED FOR REFUSE COLLECllON
SERVICES BY LAIDLAW WASTE SYSTEMS, INC. - Staff recommends
Council place ordinance on first reading and approve the resolution.
(Director of Finance and City Attorney) Continued from the meeting of
7/16/91.
A. ORDINANCE 2475 AMENDING ORDINANCE 1993 CLARIFYING METIlODOLOGY FOR
CALCULATING FUTURE RATE INCREASES TO COlLECT AND DISPOSE OF
REFUSE (first readinsd
B. RESOLUTION 16301 APPROVING RATES FOR COLLECllON AND DISPOSAL OF REFUSE
EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 1991
"^_"_~_.___~._,__u_'
Agenda
-4-
August 13, 1991
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This is an opportunity for the general public to address the City Council on any subject matter within the Council's
jurisdiction 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 yeHow wRequest to Speak Under Oral Communications Formw 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 foHow up action. Your time is limited to three minutes per speaker.
ACDON ITEMS
The items listed in this section of the agenda are erpected to elicit substantial discussions and deliberations by the
Council, staff, or members of the general public. The items will be considered individually by the Council and staff
recommendations may in certain cases be presented in the alternative. Those who wish to speak, please fill out
a wRequest to Spe~ form available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Public
comments are limited to five minutes.
14. RESOLUTION 16302 MAKING A FINDING TIlAT INTERWEST PACIFIC, LTD. IS NOT A
RESPONSIVE BIDDER; REJECDNG TIIE LOWEST BID; WAIVING
IMMATERIAL DEVIATIONS IN TIIE SECOND LOWEST BID; ACCEPTING
TIIE SECOND LOWEST BID; AND AWARDING TIIE CONTRACf FOR
wSTORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS IN SIERRA WAY FROM BROADWAY TO
COLORADO AVENUE- TO DIETRICH CORPORATION - The lowest bid for
Alternate A, from Interwest Pacific, Ltd., is not recommended for award of
contract because it failed to comply with the City's Minority and Women
Business Enterprise Construction Program (MfWBE). The contractor, who
identifies himself as Portuguese, claims that Portuguese is considered a
Hispanic minority; this is in direct contradiction to the definition of
"Hispanic" contained in the City's adopted policy. The second lowest bid
for Alternate A, by Dietrich Corporation, is recommended for award; the
contractor complied with the City's M/WBE program. The bid by Dietrich
for Alternate A is $310,974; it is $339 higher than the low bid. Staff
recommends Council: 1) adopt a finding that Interwest Pacific, Ltd. is not
a responsive bidder as it failed to comply with the City's M/WBE program;
and waiving an immaterial deviations in second lowest bid of Dietrich
Corporation; and 2) reject the lowest bid for Alternate A by Interwest
Pacific, Ltd., accept the second lowest bid by Dietrich Corporation as the
lowest responsive and responsible bidder, and award the contract for
"Storm Drain Improvements in Sierra Way from Broadway to Colorado
Avenue" to Dietrich Corporation in the amount of $310,974. (Director of
Community Development)
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
This is the time the City Council will consider items which have been forwarded to them for consideration by one
of the City's Boards, Commissions and/or Committees.
None submitted.
_..,..._..._._'^--_.~--,........~~-~.,,-"_._~--'
Agenda
-5-
August 13, 1991
ITEMS PULLED FROM TIlE 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 CounciJmembers. Public
comments are limited to five minutes per individuaL
OTI-IER BUSINESS
15. CI1Y MANAGER'S REPORT(S)
a. Scheduling of meetings.
16. MAYOR'S REPORT(S)
a. Reappointments to Boards/Commissions/Committees: Montgomery Planning Committee
and Parks and Recreation Commission.
17. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilman Rindone
a. Part-time staff assistance for City Council. Continued from the Council meeting of 7/9/91.
STItTSN#AJ r S~AAJAI.~
ADJOURNMENT "PII ~ ~ ,.., ,4 1;1 ~ IJ4
The City Council will meet in a closed session immediately following the Council meeting to discuss:
Imminently potentia1litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54856.9 - City of Chula Vista
vs. County of San Diego - Institution of litigation to enjoin the diversion of County trash to OTAY
landfill.
The meeting will adjourn to (a closed session and thence to) an Adjourned City Council Meeting on August
15, 1991 at 4:00 p.m. (immediately following the Redevelopment Agency Meeting) in the City Council
Chambers.
An Industrial Development Authority Meeting will be held immediately after the City Council Meeting.
~o..._.~"_.,._~~.__.___".._...m"_.~..~~~__.._~~"""__.--------------.
Tuesday, August 13, 1991
6:00 p.m.
City Council Chambers
Public Services Building
ADDENDUM TO AGENDA
ADJOURNMENT
The City Council will adjourn to a Closed Session immediately following the City Council meeting to discuss:
Potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - Proposed South Bay Airport
The meeting will adjourn to an Adjourned City Council Meeting on August 15, 1991 at 4:00 p.m.
(immediately following the Redevelopment Agency meeting) in the City Council Chambers.
"I declare under penalty of perjury that I am
emplo~/ed hy the City of Chu';) Vista in ti,,)
O,''':c -" .... r....' r'" ""
. _ '.'1 .~ 0, :,;e -_,1<:1 "-.cr,, En,-, tb:~~ I paste:.!
t:~tS !l[:::;.f: . on t~18 p.UnB~:;n D.J2n:1 at
th~:\ PlJ';':';~I"" (.~;.,,:"'<','iCQ~ i.~,..tl'-f:~'l~f -~"t..! ~-.-.- C"'~:',~. .' I 'I
DC:",;'E:'''\: ''V7/,';}.-';~-:'' '-:;-~"~:!"-:'~'0#"
h.-.' .""_~!..':';"~L.__.. vh.::;'~":~ _....
/
PROCLAIMING SUNDAY, AUGUST 18, 1991 AS
"CHULA VISTA PUBLIC LIBRARY DAY"
IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
WHEREAS, the Chula vista Public Library was founded one-hundred
years ago; and
WHEREAS, in 1912 the citizens requested the Library be operated
by the City of Chula vista with the guidance of the Library Board of
Trustees; and
WHEREAS, the Chula Vista Public Library has supplied children
and adults with information and educational needs as well as
recreational reading for the past century; and
WHEREAS, the Chula Vista Public Library checks out over one-million
books each year through facilities at 365 "F" Street, the Castle Park/Otay
and Woodlawn Park libraries and its Literacy Center; and
WHEREAS, the Chula Vista Public Library encourages children to
maintain their reading skills through the Summer Reading Program and
adults to improve their literacy skills through the Chula Vista Literacy
Team; and
WHEREAS, the Chula Vista Public Library provides learning and
cultural experiences in a wide variety of formats including film, videos,
compact discs, audio tapes and computerized data bases; and
WHEREAS, the Chula Vista Public Library provides innumerable
cultural and recreational programs with funding from the City and Friends
of the Chula Vista Public Library for the enjoyment of all citizens; and
WHEREAS, the Chula Vista Public Library has received a 6.7 million
dollar grant from the State of California for construction of an additional
library to provide more convenient service to the citizens of south
Chula Vista:
NOW, THEREFORE, I, TIM NADER, Mayor of the City of Chula Vista,
California do hereby proclaim Sunday, August 18, 1991 as "Chula Vista
Public Library Day" in recognition of the Library's one-hundred years
of exem lary service to the citizens of Chu1a Vista.
'i'~'
:Dated" tEisll.h.~rt!I!!f. Auqust . /9 Jl.
~ ~-A'
Z!Jl~(Jr!!f tlie C'If 5 aura VISta
4 0..- ,
Joel Kodicek
517 Manzanita Street
Chula Vista CA 91911
(619) 421-2061
The Honorable Tim Nader,
Mayor of Chula Vista
City Council of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
June 10, 1991
Dear Sirs,
It is with great regret that I inform you of my resigna-
tion from the City of Chula Vista's Youth Commission. I will
be moving to Tucson later this summer in order to begin
classes at the University of Arizona. My experience was so
positive here that I hope to join a similar commission in
Tucson, if one exists.
Please accept my gratitude for having appointed me to
the commission. I have greatly enjoyed serving as a comis-
sioner and as Vice Chair of the commission over the past
year, and I hope that I have helped the commission to advise
the Council carefully and thoughtfully on youth-related
issues within the city.
Respectfully yours,
OIJlLf ~~
Joel Kodicek
Youth Commission Vice Chair
cc Rosemary Brodbeck
Youth Commission Advisor
I
"."<4....... S
~~ ~c\ l t\)
~\~
~~ ;>.-~
~t8"~1l:I)'lI!f;."'J"'F,I r.nAAIdeJ.U.d\!lA" A TaONS
. -, t..,.:....:,.n...., t.1,- ~,,!~~' ~,~..o~."'.~, l~_~"~".\(.:..;, ' .:, ~ ~::;.'ft ' ~l. '.. ,.f.' ~tt1 . !~. P\),. ' ;, .... .
_ _~... lit ....1W"oq ..~ -,~, i;i'Vill ill . -M '~.""" iiau "~~'!'J~ . . .. .
r::~ \ ~..) '- c{,\\ -? ~~
":)0..-
r-:(-::~-C
[;,2~I9911
Pi...W.~, ..
1134 Arbusto Corte
Chula Vista, Ca~ 91910
July 18, 1991
Mr~ Robert A~ Leiter
Director of Planning
City of Chula Vista
4th Ave.. & F St~
Chula Vista, Ca.. 91010
Dear Bob:
This letter is written to inForm you of my re-
signation From the Growth Management Commission now
that our report is completed For this year.. The
reason For my resignation is purely personal, having
to do with a time commitment I must make to one of
my daughters,. I have learned much in my three years It .
on the Commission but do not have the time to commi~R~
to its work any longer.. ~~/J
I am urging a Friend who presently works a'~
educational institution in a Planning capacity~ :~e
is intelligent, community~minded and a minority.. I
Feel she has all the qualiFications one might need to
serve on this Commission.. She can bring an expertise
to the group that will be needed as their work becomes
more complex and the work schedules are altered to a
diFFerent timeFrame..
I wish you well in your endeavors to lead our
city into the Future..
lj
4Y~~lY
yours,
tv~~, ~ L\)
~~~
~ \ ~^~\
W~~~j'~"iJ~~~~J
"".9~ t;f.:""'.
(.;: tr -.\t
~~, ...
U,l, lIT," ~<.. ~I' ~t(:lt !\T',I'~ O~"', N" S
. ;./ tl'J~;" " ".{\"" ..
.~ ' At,,",' ,
5,^-Z
~ c
....../-. Y'/
~LNi..-A, 07TO
8-/3- 9/
Irl8Yoe /V/I/)L-/2, / C f)L/A'CIL J AND -5/;'I./'";=:: ..LA~/c~5 AND
GENTLEfiIAN. JnYA/AJ11=.- J~; E!/6~IIL-A OTTo OF
B ~ IJ//tt AI( C7: /J1Y' 12c-S 1!J;:.7YCE m/2 2S- ,J-c:AK:-S_
A5 A- ICfPi?ESf.NT AT/V/:.- 0 F Tile HILL To? P/Jek
Jv~ A-~ /-fc~~ TPN~#r
Cv~L I T/ON!\7o j./eoTc-ST LJ)(J-/!YO~4-eL1:.- CONDIT/olliS
711,17' /1 A V'L;:- 1: XI..s/~ i) () Yc:/2- A P L/.2/e>j) of Yt:.~1C..S A-kD
]v OW HA V C CJ20wltJ To EXTJ2J:./I//:;.- C ONOITlo/\/S_
W& /!SK Foe -LJlI/JlcD IA Ie DEcL5lo/(S ttl-h-cT/NG
THiS 60 + JVE.lb/'f'Bc>~JIa;f) CoAL /110#.
W.t=.- /1/lVL-- tfJ/E7 WI/If Yovt2. DleEc.:ro/2- OF ?rJveK-S
/flYj) J2t.c..I2t.A Tl~ IV CJAJ ::YUL (' .3 J /htb i2c.'c,c/ Vt.u If IS
T2L~PoNSI::.- ON JUL~ /10 Wit/ell WAS VNA-ccc:.i~TA3Lt:.
To Our2 /F1J:.1}/ec.K..-s. o Nt:.- CAN Ot1lL'r' IC-':.:I-D!.-
Ilc. M-J To VA i.lou ~ Co rn /C1 I'sS, C 1J.5 T D A --po \ IJ'T;
""\\-\ t. 'to A c.'T I o.u I\{ u s 7 B c: T Ai< t..l'J t
I) Pt:f2",-';CNf~LL.,'1'" hf\VC: Hf\D ~JUI\tt..({~D()~ Mt.w \~G-S
W\T\-\ ?e.f.V,ous. 1JAR.\-( D\Q.t:c..To~ ASt\:lfJ6 l-DK-
t'v\ uc.. t'\ tV t. ~ U t. 'D U\fP RO V t::. Ji.,t t.. ~T .s A t.l D )I. \ A f i\)"" t:. )\J" N c:... c-
O YJ L Y \ () 13 € '"D t: ~ e R R..C:- D A G A- It\) Ip\J 0 A 6}tI N ItS
WitS T't\t CASE 0 r OUf<- l\I~cT I i-J G 0 F JUL'f '3-
we. WI-Sit To C R.t::^IC .It SItF~ /VE/b'/lBo.e/t'tJoj)
ANIJ PAfdK ~NV/RoN/}It:.~~
A.s .ITAT~D IN oC/rL PJ::.T/17PN.) we ASfC TN/;:.-
COvtYCJL To /leT ITS oT/feR. J2E5PoNSIBL.t..- Con/~/(jNJTlc-S
I-IAJ"e !JoKe TO CflAA/Ce ovl2- PhLK 17()V/L.J F~""
J
2.
7/tt..- PIleJ;eNT 6.t.J:!l To /0 ~ pM( 1'1.5 t+RS )j To
A Ks:.~~ A. t?{ ,: \\ M C 0 r= '7 t\.t1 U JUT, L. 1) us fC .
L ?LJ::.SoH~'-LY A5/( TtfC COUNCIL- To C.'-I'M.IN~rc::.
Trrc INTo;()CATrolV /tJ OUI2... ?hR.K B,. 'PRortlF1TfNb
iHt: u.s.c: 0 FALL- nLC.oHOLI!. BJE YIEI2 A ~ e:s.
E./t'-/f OF ,0(/ flAYE THe .su/2,vt:y CoIII!JIJCrt;;--/)
B ~ fr1 ttSfLF OP Sf) (21200)/0 /I1IG CO/l//fIL/A/ / T/c-.s PAek::.,
I-Ior/IC..S ANi) THt::./R- lC~.sJelcTloI{S O/V I7LCO!fCJI-Ic.
gE.V~~fJGe.s- THE LISTIIfJG IS. AS FOLl-OWS:
lCt:I\'t:> .~~~ SUR.\lEY
A LV /::LL i2l/" P .;fiGK S ,-;,..s T Cfl1 S/-fcH/L-D j) ~ rc:..1<...
Cf2Jhlt:.- '+!(tJ 4ULJtAJ 7/f~ Po'-/Ct:::. oFrlt;.c.-~S Tlft:.-
/1I./T/-I{)~!TY To 12E/i./OVc:.- III&.- DJ?.u~ PIJSHt:.-ILSj
G It N b Met:. \" ) \'i us ) 1) ~UG. u-:s ~(2....s \ A- t--.\ D Yo V r\J c.;
A L c..o \~ 0 LtC- A B us L:.. to- T~ \ ~ ?l\ R...K \s. Loc....+ T w l) c^ R....
THi. \i\uXo? c-Lt.)1.1t:..~TAft,. SC1-toOL- ,4ND ADJA-C. z::.tuT To
Tli~ HILL\C)'? ~Q. t\\GH s.c.\toCJt-..
IH-l~ 1 ~ THE T' M E Fo(~ Tii t: )\~ C 1\;\ i3t..t~ S 0 F
J H- \S CoutUc., L. To A c.. T; To ,/\ t: ~ CO \UT 12.C) L-
o F 0 v e- PAa ~~ J NoT Rc:: Ac:..,. A- T A LA Tc:.e.. UA Te::
AS 1:' H t: c.. \l"r D F Sit IJ 'D I €GD rt~S n o'tJt::. \ \'.J
A"\TE..)vl?T\NG Tu R.t:.Movt:: Tl~L GAtJG ~Lt:_,\\fc.;vT'
FR.-O M fY\ l ~.) ) 0 l\J E ^ '1" '? A ~ K M o~ T H ..s) A PT 6.1<-
-rHt:. lJt..c...\S)o^-l~ 3HOULD H^\J~ 13C:t:N fYJA-D~
.
To TA~E... Ac:\ \ON.
ON OTHL/L PAe./c ~svc:..s
-
SURROu~ING AREA CITY PARK & RECREATION CONTROL5
PARK HOURS
NATIONAL CITY
NO ALCDHOLIC BEVERAGES
7 am.. - - 9 pm.
REFR: VAUGHN GOO, PARK & REC. SUPV.
LEMON GROVE
6 am. - - DUSK
REF~ :
NO ALCDHOLIC BEVERAGES
IN EXCESS OF 20%
ELDA ADAMS
LA MESA
BEER OR WINE WITH ~ITTEH
PERIvIIT ONLY
7 am. - -
1 HOUR AFI'ER
SUNDOWN
REFR: ALICE POLER
CORONADO
NO PARK HOURS
HmofEVER POLICE
ENFOftCED NOISE
ORDINAHCE AFI'ER 9 PM.
REFR: AMANDA BEKARANO
NO ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE~
EL CAJOK
WELL PARK
NO ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES
7 am. - - 10 pm.
12 noon - - 4 pm.
REFR: JERRY HAMDROF, PARK ASSI~TAln'
SURVEY PREP ARED BY
~~~
EUGENE A. OTTO
HILLTOP PARK NEIGHBORHOOD COALITIOX
AUGUST 12, 1991
August 9, 1991
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
Sid W. Morris, Assistant City Manager ~
.4
City Council Meeting of August 13, 1991
This will transmit the agenda and related materials for the regular
City Council meeting scheduled for Tuesday, August 13, 1991. Comments
regarding Written Communications are as follows:
5a. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE RESIGNATION OF JOEL KODICEK FROM THE
YOUTH COMMISSION AND LUPE JIMENEZ FROM THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
BE ACCEPTED WITH REGRET AND THAT LETTERS OF APPRECIATION BE SENT.
5b. This is a petition submitted by the Hilltop Park Neighborhood Coalition
requesting that Hilltop Park be closed at dusk and addressing other
concerns of the area residents. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT REPRESENTATIVES
OF THE CITY1S PARKS & RECREATION AND POLICE DEPARTMENTS MEET WITH
MEMBERS OF THE COALITION TO DISCUSS THE ISSUES RAISED, AFTER WHICH
STAFF WILL RETURN TO COUNCIL WITH A REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON
THE ALTERNATIVES.
5c. This is a request from Russell Jack Taylor, President of Chula
Vista TV & Hi-Fi Center, regarding graffiti damage to his buildings.
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THIS BE REFERRED TO STAFF FOR REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
SWM:mab
~~/~
~--=
---~----
----
----
CllY OF
(HUlA VISTA
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
July 16, 1991
Eugene A. Otto
83 Millan Court
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mr. Otto:
I appreciate your concerns ana suggestions about l-li1Jtop Park that you provided to me at
our meeting of Wednesday, July 3. As a follow up to our discussion, I would like to respond
to many of the concerns that you listed in your letter. Before doing so, I believe it is
important to inform you that certain items are within the purview of this Department to
handle, whereas other items are within a public safety concern. Thus, I will attempt to
address those items specifically related to this Department and those dealing with public
safety will be forwarded to the Chief of Police for information and comment.
On the subject of the upkeep of the park, I conducted a walkthrough this past Monday with
the Senior Park Supervisor, Jim Davis, to review many of your concerns. On the subject of
broken fences, I looked at many of the fences within the park area and they seemed to be
in an acceptable condition. However, it is my understanding that you spoke to Mr. Davis
last week and you are of the belief that there are portions of the park fence that need to
be repaired. It is my understanding that you will be providing Mr. Davis with additional
information concerning the fencing around the park.
In response to your concern about trash in the cement swale, staff has been instructed to
clean the debris from this swale. As of this week, the swale has been cleared of all debris.
Staff will monitor the condition of this swale, and should litter appear, it will be eliminated
or removed in a timely fashion.
In the area of the condition of the gazebos, I believe that the gazebos are in need of some
repair, however, it appears that they are in acceptable condition. One possible area that
may require attention, would be to study the possibility of removing the two gazebos in the
southern interior of the park and placing them in a visible location in the Park. This would
not occur immediately, but could be part of a long term Capital Improvement program that
would be prioritized with other Capital needs. As an immediate measure, the gazebos will
be washed or painted and the graffiti removed from all the picnic tables. Staff will also
remove the graffiti placed on other structures throughout the park.
You had also expressed a concern about the southwest slope areas drying out due to lack
of irrigation. When the irrigation system was installed, there was no plan to have the sloped
areas irrigated. This decision was made in order to keep the shrubs low and allow the ice
276 FOURTH AVE/CHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 91910/(619) 691-5071
Eugene A. Otto
July 16, 1991
PAGE 2
plant to eventually cover the slopes. All of the dry plant materials will be either removed
by the Parks Division or by the Public Works tree section.
In terms of limiting the access to the Park to Hilltop area and parking lot area, I am a little
unclear on what you proposed the Department should do on this issue. This is an open park
area and any fencing would in my opinion, affect the aesthetics of the park. In addition, the
amount of staff time it would take to open and close the park during the posted hours would
be very expensive and difficult to achieve. In terms of posting signs at both park entrances,
I have directed the Senior Park Supervisor to purchase and post signs dealing specifically
with the appropriate park ordinances.
Your suggestion about changing the hours of neighborhood parks from 7:00 am till dusk is
a good suggestion, and the Department will be considering this request in terms of how it
would affect not only Hilltop Park but other neighborhood parks throughout the City. This
obviously is not an issue that can be taken care of quickly as it calls for support by the Parks
and Recreation Commission and finally the City Council. I am not confident that changing
of these park hours would indeed eliminate vandalism, and teenage drugs and drinking.
However, it does give the Police officers the enforcement ability to remove people from the
park at an earlier time.
Finally, I would like to inform you that your concerns about loud drinking, parties, music,
fireworks, traffic congestion, urinating in public view, and revellers remaining in the park at
all hours is a public safety concern. Your concerns will be forwarded to the Police
Department for their review and information. I will also direct the Park Ranger to conduct
periodic visits to the Park and evaluate this apparent problem. Please bear with us,
however, because this is a busy summer season and there are other equally pressing needs
in our park system requiring her attention. I appreciate the time and effort you took to
evaluate the condition of Hilltop Park. I am very pleased to see that citizens like you take
such an interest in Chula Vista's park system.
Should you have any questions or concerns about the suggested course of action that this
Department will take to address your concerns, please feel to contact me at your earliest
convenience.
Sincerely,
Ii"'"
\ I... 1/1{ (' , . ,
"-L! .' / f L{.J I (( (f'
/ .~J"'" '-
Jess Valenzuela, Director
Department of Parks and Recreation
otto.791
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
t='r
~'=_, "-'c.<'"
n
'91
;flUG -6
",~ '-5
u ~: ~~
j;~ ~ ~:-.;
CI~".~ ". '.'
. ~.... -. ~
.I' I I ;~, "
CITY
83 Millan Ct.
rhu1a Vista, Ca. 91910
August 3, 1991
Tim Nader, Mayor
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chu1a Vista, Ca. 92010
Dear Mr. Nader:
As a long standing resident of Chula Vista at this address for
25 years, I wish to submit this petition on behalf of over 60
members of the
HILLTOP PARK NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION
TO BE PLACED ON CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
AUGUST 13, 1991.
Members of the Hilltop Park Coalition have strongly requested
these civic issuet'l be brought to the attention of our elected
representati ves on the CITY COUNCIL IMMEDIAT:&,,'LY.
Sincerely,
~d~
Eugene A. Otto
EAO:ca
ATT ACH: 3
~~ ~~ lc:,j
~~ ~-.,
~ ~ ~ ~\~
W. " mI' T,.'~t\~ t-r?\ I14,A~\1! ~ ~!~,tHlL~ l"" ~t!f"4't>.NS
ri'~', .1 K, ~.~ ,;, 'i:!:' t,",,_, '.Ii. ,,'j ,c' -"'" ~~. t" ',r,~ !!oi'. "'<",'i "." ,I. .'.'..... ~. '. I,., '" ~.!. . }.~.. .......
.. - - IIiIiII _1Oi.I 'U ~ ~ JiJi 'wi ~~ \V ~~~' ~ .~ iJ -4'~A' '~,~ Q ~ "t~;' ~ .
r <tsll~ f~~
5t> - I
THE UNDERSIGN~ NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION Y~~~ZR~ ARE PROTESTIIG
UlfFAVORABLE C );,":)ITIONS AT HILLTOP PARK LOC.LED BEI'WEEN HILLTOP
DRIVE, FIRST AVENUE, MILLAN COURT, K 3T~, J. ~TREm PLACE, AID
VALLECITO WAY. 1m STRONGLY REQUEST PARK HOURS BE CHANGED IMMEDIATELY
TO AX EARLIER CLOSING AT DUSK.
~
c;!{). 13~
R~tYb~\-\U\~_
~ -r 16ft-
~
..-,
, I
,/ )_. -" ~~ ;",/-',-.-'"--
. . ..... . ~ ~
..
,~/ a,~~
/
~~ ~h'"~
_/~~ /~~
~~~~~
U~~R~
-
o
Sb,2..
.z.,~ct1i:'i"'^' " fr'. .... ~. .' . , .,.
c ..5'.' ~",~l!f',4'~rl~~;~" ""i,'li;. '.~.c;t''1l1''.C' "". ." ,.~.
"",',' "...!L.....,~ . ..~1ii~
\"
1;,.,.-:
\.
~
\.
\
.
...,
i
,:
".;' :~,;!~i,-,. ;.
~i:
h:.. ....
~ ","
"};;:_:'~
",.". ';flol!!I -~
I., .:.
'''--.< ,.
;.:c'.}'i',
..... ....
,~ ~...' -"..;' " .' ....,r,.., _,.,
~-':;~?!~t:4':t. . "',:":,, "
ft;!
,........... ..'
.. ",-it..""",.. ".,' .,,'-
'.: "', -, ~ ' .' .y;' : ':.'-,
~' .'.,' ~'." ,,',~": ..~ .'-"
", ," ''''<
-, ~"-"~".
Iiil!L';
~;-:':~;".'
~."'.
....: '.>!,- 1)';--'. ~: .~~ .', ,.,;:. " ,..'T'
,'1)'---,-,,"\ ';\:......t,<f,;i. .'.' "'.' -',
,-:'.o~."""""IJ'-. ._:0"",;>".' ':
,~
/.l.':';;"":
,
"~,,. 4
.-' -,."-,,,j>,;
~..._,..., '. .,..;If..
.'.' .' 'H"
\
,~""..'
'''~.
.'.,.
..."......,.
L _""$,,!,;,',
.1(t
",iM'
",' ~. ~~:!-t.,.....t~-:~K-
- "~ . ,.".-, -. .'
.
\.
"""..
',....t_...
~
..
"'ih:~
.,.~:;,7:;t.
\
....".
.'t{fj'f
t~
'\'~lf
1
.-.'....
~,~
~
~,L--'G.-
THE UNDERSIGNED NEIGHBORE02~ COALITION MEMBER~ ARE PROTESTIWG
':.JlfFAVORABLE CDNDITIONS AT HILLTOP PARK LOCATED BErW3EN HILLTOP
DRIVE, FIRST AVENUE, MILLAN COURT, K STREET, J. 5THEEl' PLACE, A1ID
VALLECITO iiAY. WE ST1\ONGLY REQUEST PARK HOURS BE CHANGj:.'D IMME.'DIATELY
TO AN EARLIER CLOSING AT DUSK.
~IGlfATURE~
ADDRESSE~
~j(lJuJ~ tu~
~ ~
~ }--:7 /l r ,#J;p /f/~ '/
I
v.~L
LJ~
r{!~hi.t,..) ~
--
aP O'-() J2-
5 b ;.3
\f'
,~::~'<~'!i~? .
~;:T.:>:-~':_i"
fw:,
~'liI'"
,- ^~, .~!t.";;; . "
. ".'._..~, ',.,'-CO;
~~;~., ,....,'l!^i~1~A~:\_;-,.
~.,.""."'~,.
'~'4;.!if:' ''''i''F''''' ','," ". "".;"',
':-;<':;:~~~'~'" """ ;+-!- ,
., ',,-t:,:;.' :., :,,<'~\
, ,
. -, - ...."...,.,....
t~.., , ','
.' ,,,,
.
t
~.,.'.
~'
J
,
t
1
f\
"
. ~""
I,;~'I#, .'"
*'!''-'''''''''''''' ""'^,,'.,. , ,',' J" <l:i,U
J" . --;"_...:~
,,"f',;.,
"""",.'. "..'~.'."',. "'. '.
. """"", ,.,_.,{,.
~,,' I';'
~
",:~~~~'
'I' .
,.,*,,;
,.~r~,
:~:t}::.?
l!~ .,....s_
J~~'"if
"}..~."',\,:,,.,'~. '",
" ' ,,' ,"""'", - "~".
";~., " 'j',- ',,;
:T,^t',"
".""
".'
~ '. .'ir
," ",
, '-.<It<;",
"~.....
.-',"'.- .
~ .'~. ,;
""1(f
"'iio!;f~t
: '...\....~~j.,';., .
, '-'>!"";";'~~"'"
",,;~,
" ..~
~
~-,
, "_.~
,~-, J~-":Y~
;,..'> ...~"!W '''" "
~' ~~,;\~;;~,~,
ff:~ :~'.i!
't~'ifr~.
'.. "'A.~"'"
:f<"~~~ '~.~
,'".
<~,:"","~,,,,,~.,
'1,;
"';;:\;"""'''''''1;''
THE UNDERSI~~3D NEIGHBORHOOD COALITIOX ~3ER~ ARE PROTESTIXG
UNFAVORABLE C jNDITIONS AT HILLTOP PARK LOCATED BETWEEN HILLTOP
DRIVE, FIRST AVENUE, MILLAN COURT, K ~T::E&T, J. ~TREET PLACE, AID
VALLECITO "riAY. WE STRONGLY REQUEST PARK HOURS BE CHANGED IMM:sDIATELY
TO AN EARLIER CLOSING AT DUSK.
~IGNATURE~
ADDRZSSE~
Ro~--/e, ~c.hI71;j
/kh I? ~-2I
.
-
~1v.~~J
-
:L _~~
=---
- .
.~~.. - ...
....
---
J. \.._
..
- - ----
CJ
Cjb.~
.~'~'"
y;~--~~ \t,
.!\~
'f
""
--
f"l,
t"
l')'"
"
. '.
.;...'
rj<~'
~:~'
,
~;11
\'1;'"
lit . .n1"~.~.,,
111' '~"'"",'"
6.;'.".:,:
r.-~.'...:"
, ".,
:'-
"'dIII.
<,--~
I;'
~.
,~~,
,;
t
l
,,,
f~
f'P'
f' ;;"
t
,......,"l!.~
""-v:-::'i:(L~
;'ilI"
..."".....'1';.....
,..>..,t~ ~/ .." ..
"
, ,I",.., ~
.~"..
'_:';."~::!!,,
,.....
...~~.~..
".'.-- .-~' '.- .
lii:".",
, '., .
.. ;~! <'~7:+';.
"'W'"
. .. .. '" " - '.:-~'
u' .:"",'; ...... . .
'.'.
",..""...,j.'.'...:u.... .
t,_ _.~:'C'"~.~ ',.. .
,',.
:,,/,4.
..~
........
"4_.
'~';I. '~'IIf.J
".,,,,,,,",'" .~..'
", .;-'..,, ~'~-
.""
~....;,...;
. "'''''' . ";""(;'~'~' '. ". .... ....
~~-'.;;:.:"~_'~~>;'r.:-<;~';"'-""<'<i:,::_'~';~~'ik;~", .,_'_.,...." _ "..'
"
..,.~_s_
~:'- ,', -.'i,f.,r~,V-. .+-t' ..:'
;......,'.,',.-.,/.,..: '..
. ...i,.....""~._" ',$;,'". ..' \', '
," ....:'1
'--'-~:f
. .~,.;....J~!'J~
"""~."W.".
;:...::~
~.
;V'~'~~
.,
> ":ti-\"'(v
, '~1.
,,*l;itr/i'i'a"'>> ""\.. '.
.......'..,...;;'"...,;;,;:,.,,,1';,, ,., ","..,11.,;;".,3.3.#
83 MiTran~t
Chula Vista, Ca.
Jess Valenzuela, Director
Parks and Recreation Department of Chula vista
Dear Mr. Valenzuela:
THE HILLTOP PARK NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION HAS ASKED ME TO ADDRESS
THE DETERIORATING CONDITIONS OF THE PARK WITH THE OFFICIALS OF
CHULA VISTA.
The following conditions were reviewed and considered a priority
to the home owners in this neighborhood. The following conditions
are important, requiring a physical review with yourself, your
staff, and representatives of the neighborhood.
SAFETY. SANITARY. AND NOISE POLLUTION:
The park has become maximized by users resulting in the
following:
A. Large groups of loud alcohol drinking parties.
B. Loud music carrying to adjacent areas, fireworks, baseball
games, and horseshoe pitching.
C. Traffic congestion, parking on all streets, prohibiting
residents from their use of parking in front of their homes.
D. Urinating in public view over into neighbors yards.
E. Glass bottle breakage on walks, bicycle riding on public
walks.
F. Absence of lighting in west end of park, encouraging gang
activity and drug sales.
G. Dogs running off leashes, defecating on walkways, attracting
flies.
H. Gang members meeting in parking, shouting at all hours.
MINIMAL MAINTENANCE OF PARK BY PARK EMPLOYEES:
A. Limited to grass cutting only.
B. Fences broken down, no repairs.
C. Mosquito breeding in standing water in drainage ditch. Trash
thrown in ditch. No cleaning.
D. Gazebos in need of repair and paint. Extremely unsightly.
~b ..6
July 03, 1991
-2-
E. Unmentionable graffiti (NOT REMOVED). Numerous complaints
called in to Parks Departaent.
F. Bank areas of park allowed to dry out. Dead trees and shrubs
constituting fire hazards to adjacent property owners.
G. continuous vandalism of facilities and surrounding proper-
ties. Neighbors having to police the area themselves.
CONTROL REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN A STABILIZED AND SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD
PARK ENVIRONMENT:
A. Limit entrances to Hilltop Park from Hilltop Drive, car
parking available.
B. continue fencing and gates to entrance to secure park after
closing hours.
C. Post signs at both park entrances pertaining to:
Dog leash ordinance.
No glass bottles allowed.
Park hours.
Fines for littering.
D. Routine police patrol. Check teenage drinking, and gang
meetings.
E. Park Ranger, Animal Control Officer, to enforce Dog Leash Law
and Defecating Law.
F.
TO NEIGHBORHOOD RIGHTS. ALSO, IER CLOS AT DUSK
WOULD DISCOURAGE THE GRAFFITI VANDALISM AND TEENAGE DRUG USE,
TEENAGE DRINKING, DRUG SALES, AND GANG INVOLVEMENT. THIS
COALITION WOULD STRONGLY RECOMMEND HOURS 7:00 A.M. - DUSK.
The above is an overview of items which the Neighborhood Coalition
requires immediate action from the CITY OF CHULA VISTA.
Sincerely,
~L?~
Eugene A. otto
cc: Tim Nader, Mayor of Chula Vista
John Goss, City Manager
Bruce Boogaard, City Attorney
William S. Winters, Chief of Police
City Council - D. Malcolm, L. Moore, J. Rindone
Sweetwater Union District Board Members
Chula vista Animal Control
San Diego County Health Department - Vector Control
Parks and Recreation Commission - Chula vista
Hilltop Park Neighborhood Coalition Members
S-b-"
~~/?-
~~
--' --' --'-
----
~~........~
;?~~ c~~v
~J~~,~jL
Jd:l;'d~4 ~7-~?
CllY OF
CHUlA VISTA
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
Eugene A. Otto
83 Millan Court
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mr. Otto:
I appreciate your concerns ana suggestions about H:i1Jtop Park that you provided to me at
our meeting of Wednesday, July 3. As a follow up to our discussion, I would like to respond
to many of the concerns that you listed in your letter. Before doing so, I believe it is
important to inform you that certain items are within the purview of this Department to
handle, whereas other items are within a public safety concern. Thus, I will attempt to
address those items specifically related to this Department and those dealing with public
safety will be forwarded to the Chief of Police for information and comment.
On the subject of the upkeep of the park, I conducted a walkthrough this past Monday with
the Senior Park Supervisor, Jim Davis, to review many of your concerns. On the subject of
broken fences, I looked at many of the fences within the park area and they seemed to be
in an acceptable condition. However, it is my understanding that you spoke to Mr. Davis
last week and you are of the belief that there are portions of the park fence that need to
be repaired. It is my understanding that you will be providing Mr. Davis with additional
information concerning the fencing around the park.
In response to your concern about trash in the cement swale, staff has been instructed to
clean the debris from this swale. As of this week, the swale has been cleared of all debris.
Staff will monitor the condition of this swale, and should litter appear, it will be eliminated
or removed in a timely fashion.
In the area of the condition of the gazebos, I believe that the gazebos are in need of some
repair, however, it appears that they are in acceptable condition. One possible area that
may require attention, would be to study the possibility of removing the two gazebos in the
southern interior of the park and placing them in a visible location in the Park. This would
not occur immediately, but could be part of a long term Capital Improvement program that
would be prioritized with other Capital needs. As an immediate measure, the gazebos will
be washed or painted and the graffiti removed from all the picnic tables. Staff will also
remove the graffiti placed on other structures throughout the park.
You had also expressed a concern about the southwest slope areas drying out due to lack
of irrigation. When the irrigation system was installed, there was no plan to have the sloped
areas irrigated. This decision was made in order to keep the shrubs low and allow the ice
5b.1
276 FOURTH AVE/CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910/(619) 691-5071
Eugene A Qtto
July 16, 1991
PAGE 2
plant to eventually cover the slopes. All of the dry plant materials will be either removed
by the Parks Division or by the Public Works tree section.
In terms of limiting the access to the Park to Hilltop area and parking lot area, I am a little
unclear on what you proposed the Department should do on this issue. This is an open park
area and any fencing would in my opinion, affect the aesthetics of the park. In addition, the
amount of staff time it would take to open and close the park during the posted hours would
be very expensive and difficult to achieve. In terms of posting signs at both park entrances,
I have directed the Senior Park Supervisor to purchase and post signs dealing specifically
with the appropriate park ordinances.
Your suggestion about changing the hours of neighborhood parks from 7:00 am till dusk is
a good suggestion, and the Department will be considering this request in terms of how it
would affect not only Hilltop Park but other neighborhood parks throughout the City. This
obviously is not an issue that can be taken care of quickly as it calls for support by the Parks
and Recreation Commission and finally the City Council. I am not confident that changing
of these park hours would indeed eliminate vandalism, and teenage drugs and drinking.
However, it does give the Police officers the enforcement ability to remove people from the
park at an earlier time.
Finally, I would like to inform you that your concerns about loud drinking, parties, music,
fireworks, traffic congestion, urinating in public view, and revellers remaining in the park at
all hours is a public safety concern. Your concerns will be forwarded to the Police
Department for their review and information. I will also direct the Park Ranger to conduct
periodic visits to the Park and evaluate this apparent problem. Please bear with us,
however, because this is a busy summer season and there are other equally pressing needs
in our park system requiring her attention. I appreciate the time and effort you took to
evaluate the condition of Hilltop Park. I am very pleased to see that citizens like you take
such an interest in Chula Vista's park system.
Should you have any questions or concerns about the suggested course of action that this
Department will take to address your concerns, please feel to contact me at your earliest
convemence.
Sincerely,
/l
/ I /)
\J;~r [/K({!.{J(ci(f',-
J ess Valenzuela, Director
Department of Parks and Recreation
otto.791
t;b · ~
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
CHULA VISTA TV & Hi-Fi CENTER, INC.
695 THIRD AVENUE
CHULA VISTA, CA 91910
(619) 585-4100
August 5t 1991
The Honorable Tim Nader
Mayor of Chu1a Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chu1a Vista, CA 91910
Mr. Mayor,
On Monday, August 5, 1991, I came to work to find that two of the buildings on my
property at the corner of Third and "J" Sts. had graffitti on them. This incident
happened sometime between 6pm. Saturday, Aug. 3rd and 8am. Monday, Aug.5th.
We also reported another incidence on June 15, 1991, when the motorhome parked
on my property had graffitti along one side of it. We called the Chula Vista Police
Dept. and requested they come down and take a report of the damage on both
occasions. The police. made a big issue of having to make a report on the June
incident, but were much more co-operative on the report in August.
We were told that there would be extra police patrols put in place for this area.
We have had several times when our alarm has gone off, but they were called
"FALSE ALARMS", since by the time the police arrivedt there was no one here.
Obviously, these alarms have not been false and there have been people on the
premises on more than one occasion. You charge us $50 for false alarms. How
about us charging you for the clean up of the graffitti on my property?
I suggest you set up a system of voluntary patrols of reservists for the business
districts. Last time I suggested this idea to Chief Winters, he said the laws and the
costs prohibit reservists from doing this. These reservists would not have the
power to arrestt but only to observe and call in the police when they see something.
You and the Council have to find a solution to this problem. The business people of
Chula Vista pay the city a great deal of money in taxes and deserve to be protected
by our elected officials. This system would also save the tax payers money in the
clean up and repair to their damaged property.
As our elected officialst you must find a way to get the job done. The business
people of Chula Vista should not be penalized for the actions of these criminals.
I expect a prompt, written response outlining your own solution to this matter.
Sincerely,
f~atV~
RUSSEL(;~CK TAYLOR
President
cc: Leonard Moore, Chula Vista City Council
Jerry Rindone, Chula Vista City Council
. . ~ Dave Malcolm, Chula Vista City Council
l01,\~~ ll\ Shirley Grasser Horton, Chula Vista City Council
'0-.~~-' . Chu]a Vista Poiice Chief Winters
~.' .~ ~~no;~ . Ifn/' W8IT~111~ fP'l~~ f{) la 4: ::"
~~' ""-' IOU I!j;; .... ~,.., !;j ~. ,,;;
\~ . Sc-l
,:' ", ,"1':.1 r,. r"",;; ill ',,';"'''' ~, ~' S
~_. ,'j';:';:.. };"! ~~. (i' -'~1 :ti-fA
",. ,~~ "'1'" J',o" ~< f~ ',i'..,t.' i'i,: '''.
tJi~,. "::i, '-,:: ~~"--'~ fo;t ... "*'!~~:"" []
council Agenda statement
Item:kb,c..d-
o<t-~~ Meeting Date: AUgust~,.\ 1'!I\'il
ord~nce No. 2473: ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL \
Or~HE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING SUBSECTION (A)
'<<eRIMINAL PENALTIES" OF SECTION 9.20.050 "PENALTIES
~0rOR VIOLATION OF CHAPTER" OF CHAPTER 9.20 "PROPERTY
~ DEFACEMENT" OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE TO
<<;-.<<J PROVIDE FOR AN ENFORCEMENT POLICY FOR WRONGFUL
~<v DISPLAY OF AEROSOL PAINT CONTAINERS AND FELT TIP
<::><vCJO MARKERS.
ordin~~No. 2470 AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF
CAA~~' 9.20 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALTER OR
'ENHANCE THE CRIMINAL AND/OR CIVIL PENALTIES
ASSOCIATED WITH GRAFFITI-RELATED VIOLATIONS
(second reading).
~\O~
~dJ:nance (E) No. 2471 AMENDING CHAPTER 9.20 BY
~~~\) rxMENDING SECTION 9.20.035 (second reading).
\\,'.G I
~~~9' O~<!~~ (F) No. 2472 AMENDING CHAPTER 9.20 BY
~CO~Q G p..N~rnG THE TITLE TO SECTION 9.20.037 (second
S . "'\) Rt:.F\\)\N reading) . [\\)
stCO\~ . .il'~\'X
Subm1tted by: Bruce M. Boogaard, C1ty Attorney \
Item Title:
,.-,~
o\:'S"
St(,C
4/5ths Vote: ( ) Yes (X) No
At their meeting of July 16, 1991, the city Council adopted
Ordinance No. 2464 which, among other things, created criminal
liability for a merchant's wrongful display of "graffiti-abIes".
At their meeting of July 23, 1991, the city Council directed
the city Attorney to prepare an enforcement policy conditioned on
providing general notice to the business community and specific
notice of a violation, prior to commencement of criminal
prosecution.
Boards and commissions Recommendation:
Although there hasn't been time for a review by the Graffiti
graf22.wp
July 30, 1991
Al13 re Penalties for Graffiti-Related Violations
Page 1
tc- ,
Task Force, staff believes that the enforcement policy as presented
would meet with their approval.
~
Recommendation:
Adopt the attached ordinance, establishing an enforcement
policy which requires generalized notice of the enactment of the
wrongful display provisions, specific notice of a violation, and 10
days to correct same, prior to the commencement of prosecution.
Place the remaining ordinances on second reading.
Discussion:
The staff desires to use the criminal liability provJ.sJ.on
associated wi th wrongful display, not to prosecute our local
merchants, but to encourage them to keep their spray cans and felt
tip markers from public access.
The attached enforcement policy is typical of the way the City
Attorney approaches most all code violations, but its codification
will serve to alleviate merchant concerns of possibly overzealous
enforcement.
No further discussion on the issue is deemed appropriate.
Also attached for you second reading is Ordinance No. 2470 as ~.
amended; Ordinance (E) No. 2471; and Ordinance (F) No. 2472; to
reflect the Council's direction at the meeting of July 23, 1991.
Also attached as Exhibit A, for your permanent files, is
Chapter 9.20, "Property Defacement", as compiled to the current
date to reflect and incorporate all changes made to the chapter to
date, including Ordinance No. 2470, Ordinance E (2471) and
Ordinance F (2472) and the proposed Ordinance 2473.
Fiscal Impact:
There will be some additional costs associated with the
administration of the enforcement policy, which will include
notification of the merchant community trading in spray cans and
felt tip markers, and with second fOllow-up visits 10 days after
notice is given for a specific violation, but the amount is
currently incapable of calculation, and estimated to be negligble
on an incremental basis, considering the cost of code enforcement
in general. It will be paid out of current appropriations for code
enforcement.
graf22.wp
July 30, 1991
Al13 re Penalties for Graffiti-Related violations
Page 2
......,
b-l.
,8~C ~
O;tlb
~~b/,
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY ~
CHULA VISTA AMENDING SUBSECTION (A) "CRIMINAL -1l}1b
PENALTIES" OF SECTION 9.20.050 "PENALTIES FOR -1~b
VIOLATION OF CHAPTER" OF CHAPTER 9. 20 ~~
"PROPERTY DEFACEMENT" OF THE CHULA VISTA Ol}l
MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROVIDE FOR AN ENFORCEMENT
POLICY FOR WRONGFUL DISPLAY OF AEROSOL PAINT
CONTAINERS AND FELT TIP MARKERS.
DRAFT
ORDINANCE NO. 2473
WHEREAS, at their Council Meeting of July 16, 1991, the City
Council introduced Ordinance No. 2464; and,
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 2464 contained a provision, section I,
imposing criminal liability on merchants for the "wrongful display"
of aerosol paint containers and felt tip markers; and,
WHEREAS, at their Council meeting of July 23, 1991, the City
Council requested the City Attorney to bring back an enforcement
policy that would provide for adequate notice, prior to
commencement of criminal prosecution, to local merchants of the
responsibility for containing aerosol paint containers and felt tip
markers within areas of their stores from which the public is
precluded; and,
WHEREAS, the purpose of this ordinance is to set forth such an
enforcement policy;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
section 1. Subsection A "Criminal Penalties" of section
9.20.050 "Penalties for Violation of Chapter" of Chapter 9.20
"Property Defacement" is hereby amended to read as follows:
"
A. Criminal Penalties. Any and all violations of this
chapter shall be punishable either as an infraction or a mis-
demeanor, at the discretion of the City Attorney. It ia fur
thcr undcrotood that financial 13arcntal rcoponoibility for any
acto of vandaliom Bhall Be strictly enforced.'
1. Enforcement Policy as to Wronaful Disolay.
NotwithstandinCl' the foreqoinq. it shall be the
policy of the city that the criminal prosecution of
a violation of Subsection C. "Disolay for the
Purooses of Sale" of section 9.20.040. "Prohibition
of sale. oossession. display for purposes of sale.
and storage of aerosol oaint containers". or
graf35.wp
July 30, 1991
Ordinance No. 2473
Page 1
Co cL- t
Subsection C. "Display for the Purposes of Sale" of "'""""
Section 9.20.045. "Prohibition of sale. possession
and display of felt tip markers" shall commence
onlY after the followinq two eyents haye occurred:
(1) Notice of the enactment of the Section
9.20.040(C) and/or 9.20.045(C) haye been mailed to
the violator: and (2) notice of a specific act of
violation has been provided to the violator. and 10
days thereafter have elapsed without correction or
remediation of the violation. Nothinq herein in
this enforcement policy shall operate to condition
the riqht of the City to prosecute. or cause the
prosecution. of a violation of this Chapter."
Presented by:
ed ale f
ruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
:>>
John Lippitt
Public Works Director
graf35.wp
Endnotes:
--..,
1. This is proposed for deletion because the City Council deleted,
on staff's recommendation, our local parental civil responsibility
provision, relying instead on state Law.
graf35.wp
July 30, 1991
Ordinance No. 2473
Page 2
.~
(ocA-2.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 7
ITEM TITLE:
Meeting Date 8/13/91
Ordinance 2'17c./ Amending seC7JMtionl 200..010. of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code Relating to penalt . rov~f~o~s
Assistant City Attorney Frits I~
(4/5ths Vote: Yes No X )
--
SUBMITTED BY:
RECOMMENDATION:
Amend Chula Vista Municipal Code as outlined below.
BOARDS/<DMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: N/A
DISCUSSION:
Currently, Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 1.20.010 provides for penalties
for an infraction of up to $500.00. This conflicts both with State law and
with our Charter, both of which limit the penalty for an infraction to
$250.00. In order to make our Municipal Code compatible, both with our
Charter and State law, we should amend section 1.20.010 to limit infraction
penalties to $250.00, as per the attached amendment.
FISCAL IMPACT: Theoretically, this amendment could result in the collection
of smaller fines and the consequent reduction in the City's collection of its
share of such monies.
9l50a
1-,/7-2.
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
I tern ~
ITEM TITLE:
Meeting Date 8-13-91
Resolution JL-~3 Authorizing sale of surplus patrol
vehicles to the City of Tijuana
Director of Finance k~
City Manager~ ~~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No-L)
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
In response to a request from the Mayor of Tijuana and the Director of the San
Diego County Department of Transborder Affairs, the Council by Ordinance No.
2310 amended Section 2.56.220 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code relating to
the d i sposa 1 of surplus supp 1 i es, materi a 1 s, and equ i pment. The purpose of
the amendment was to provide the Council flexibility in cooperating with other
jurisdictions in the disposition of City property. The Council has the
discretion to transfer or sell surplus vehicles to the City of Tijuana. The
practice under the county program has been to try to provide surplus patrol
vehicles at a price perhaps under the market value as a gesture of goodwill.
Four patrol vehicles were last sold by Chula Vista to the City of Tijuana on
October, 1989.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council authorize the sale of twenty-one patrol
vehicles to the City of Tijuana.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSS ION:
Twenty-one patrol vehicles have been removed from service with the placement
into service of new vehicles received in FY90-91 and with the purchase of
eleven new units in June, 1991. The attached sheet lists the vehicles
declared surplus.
The Equipment Maintenance Superintendent submitted the list noting year,
manufacturer, vehicle ID number, mileage and condition of vehicle. Many of
the vehicles are in very poor condition and Tijuana is purchasing them in
order to obtain additional parts. The representative from the City of Tijuana
inspected the vehi cl es and offered the amounts shown on the attached sheet.
The total is $7,500. The monies offered are based on condition of the
vehicles and are somewhat less than what would be expected if the vehicles
were sent to the joint agency county auction. By selling directly to Tijuana,
staff and administrative costs (estimated to be $1,100) normally incurred in
transporting vehicles to San Diego for the auction will be eliminated. Also,
there will not be an auctioneer commission charge.
FISCAL IMPACT: The vehicles would probably bring a higher price at the
County auction. However, by selling directly to Tijuana, certain
administrative and transporting costs are saved.
WPC 0293U
<6 -I
PATROL UNITS FOR DISPOSAL
City
Amount Prop.
Offered Year Make Vehicle ID il9-it Mil eaQe Status
$300 1982 Chev IG8EK18H8CF133973 14796 117215 Runs rough
200 1983 Dodge 2B3BG26S2DR242391 13771 117422 OK, battery dead
50 1983 Dodge 2B3BG26S0AR242390 13770 88981 Burnt wire loom, parts
only
300 1985 Ford 2FABP43G3FX116491 13926 84200 Runs rough
500 1987 Chev IGIBL5164HA159604 15759 102950 OK
500 1987 Chev IGIBL5167HA159709 15761 87941 OK, runs rough
400 1987 Chev IGIBL5164HA159621 15757 102895 Dent, l/f fender
500 1987 Chev IGIBL5163HA159755 15763 137906 OK
350 1987 Chev IGIBL5161HA159768 15764 82662 Bad carburetor,
battery dead
500 1987 Chev IGIBL5168HA159637 15758 84240 Runs OK, battery bad
500 1987 Chev IGBL5166HA60155 15762 78680 OK
500 1987 Ford 2FABP72F7HX179820 15205 122239 OK
500 1987 Ford 2FABP72F4HX179824 15209 118559 OK
500 1987 Ford 2FABP72F6HX179825 15210 113709 OK
500 1987 Dodge IB3BG26S6HX771982 14825 81353 OK
50 1987 Dodge IB3BG26S6HX771978 14821 70691 Missing r/f door, r/f
fender, steering
column, transmission,
parts only
500 1987 Dodge IB3BG26S4HX771977 14820 83958 OK
350 1987 Dodge IB3BG26S2HX771976 14819 72405 Bad transmission
300 1987 Dodge IB3BG26508X771975 14818 73051 Runs rough
50 1988 Chev IGIBL5168JR207791 16389 96540 Rear end bad, no
steering, computer
pulled, parts only
150 1988 Chev IGIBL5161JR208894 16397 63946 Motor bad
WPC 0292U
~-~
DRAFT
RESOLUTION NO. I ~ 1Q,3
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING SALE OF SURPLUS
PATROL VEHICLES TO THE CITY OF TIJUANA
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does
hereby resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, in response to a request from the Mayor of
Ti juana and the Director of the San Diego County Department of
Transborder Affairs, the Council by Ordinance No. 2310 amended
Section 2.56.220 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code relating to
the disposal of surplus supplies, materials, and equipment, and
WHEREAS, the purpose of the amendment was to
provide the Council flexibility in cooperating with other
jurisdictions in the disposition of City property, and
WHEREAS, the Council has the discretion to transfer
or sell surplus police vehicles to the Ci ty of Ti juana and the
practice under the County program has been to try to provide
surplus patrol vehicles at a price perhaps under the market value
as a gesture of goodwill, and
WHEREAS, the 21 patrol vehicles which have been
removed from service by the Equipment Maintenance Division and
been declared surplus are one 1982 Chevrolet, two 1983 Dodges,
one 1985 Ford, seven 1987 Chevrolets, three 1987 Fords, five 1987
Dodges and two 1988 Chevrolets, and
WHEREAS, the representative
Ti juana has offered $7,500 for these
approximately 50% of what would be expected
sent to the joint county auction, and
from the City of
vehicles, which is
if the vehicles were
WHEREAS, by selling directly to Ti juana, staff and
administrative costs normally incurred in transporting vehicles
to San Diego for the auction will be eliminated and there will
not be an auctioneer commission cost.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City
Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby authorize the sale
of 21 surplus patrol vehicles to the City of Tijuana.
Presented by
!!led
Bruce M.
Attorney
Lyman Christopher, Director of
Finance
9161a
~-3
1::1
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item q A ~ '8
Meeting Date 8/13/91
ITEM TITLE:
Resolution I~ 'lq~
National city for
Animal Shelter
Approving agreement with
use of the Chula vista
Resolution JID1.liS Approving agreement with
Imperial Beach for use of the Chula vista
Animal Shelter
Chief of ~ L. $1~.
REVIEWED BY: ci ty Manager.J1i ~5thS Vote: Yes_No-1Ll
Chula vista provides animal shelter services for the cities of
National city and Imperial Beach. These agreements are being
renewed to continue providing this service for FY 1991-92.
SUBMITTED BY:
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the agreements.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The cities of Imperial Beach and National city do not have animal
shelters and have been contracting with Chula vista to provide
animal sheltering services only. No field services have been
provided by Chula vista to either city under this contract.
The basis for determining the fees for National City and
Imperial Beach is based on the costs to operate the shelter and the
percentage of animals each jurisdiction brings into the shelter.
A review of fiscal year 1990 and 1991 statistics indicates that
while Chula vista and National City residents continue to use the
shelter more frequently, Imperial Beach's use has declined.
NATIONAL CITY AND IMPERIAL BEACH USE
ANIMALS BROUGHT INTO SHELTER
Change
~ of ~ of From
0 0
FY 1990 Total END 1990 Total Prior Year
Chula vista 6,830 69% 7,320 71% +7%
National
city 2,044 21% 2,252 22% +10%
Imperial
Beach 941 10% 768 7% -18%
9,815 100% 10,340 100% +5%
q-l
Cost to Operate Shelter
Page 2, Item3 A ... '&
Meeting Date 8/13/91
The cost to operate the shelter for FY 1991 has not changed
significantly from the prior year. These costs are based on the
full salaries and benefits of two Kennel Attendants and our
Administrative Office Assistant. Staff also estimates that 20% of
the salary and benefits of the Senior Animal Control Officer are
attributable to management of the shelter. The remaining costs are
service and supply costs related to the operation of the shelter.
Salaries
2.0 Kennel Attendants (100%)
1.0 Admin. Off. Asst. (100%)
1.0 Sr. Animal Control Officer (20% of $31,276)
Benefits
Retirement
Flex Benefit
Medicare
Work Compo
Overtime/Callback
Vet. Services
utilities
Telephone
Trash
Animal Disposal Contract
Medical/Lab Supplies
Repairs to Shelter Facility
Food
Supplies for Animals
$47,030
19,540
7,108
$73,678
$8,799
12,422
98
2.180
$23,499
11,110
5,610
12,960
680
1,220
9,580
8,780
500
5,160
2,360
$57,960
$155.137
Based on these costs, the monthly charges for each agency to
provide the same level of service in FY 1991-92 as in FY 1990-91
would be as follows:
Total % of Annual Monthly Cost
city Opere Cost Use Cost (Divided bv 12)
National City $155,137 22% $34,130 $2,844.00
Imperial Beach $155,137 7% 10,860 $905.00
Chula vista $155,137 71% 110,147 N/A
'" . 'J-
Page 3, Item q A .....8
Meeting Date 8/13/91
Imperial Beach has requested Chula vista provide after hours,
emergency animal control. Staff has agreed to provide these
services, primarily the capture of loose, vicious animals, on a
twelve-month trial basis. Staff will evaluate the program and
determine the viability of continuing this increased level of
service at the rates given below in July, 1992.
Imperial Beach has agreed to pay 50% of Chula vista's proportion of
overtime/Callback Expenses to cover the cost of these services.
Additionally, staff is recommending that Imperial Beach be assessed
10% of the Shelter's equipment maintenance and replacement costs to
reflect the use of vehicles and other equipment necessary to
perform the proposed services.
The additional costs to be factored into Imperial Beach's agreement
for the service level increase include:
Personnel Expenses
Chula vista's Proportion
of Overtime/Callback (50% of 71% of budget)
$3,944
Equipment Expense
Equipment Replacement
Equipment Maintenance
615
1.763
$6,322 annual cost
$ 527 monthly cost
The agreement is proposed to be amended to include the revised
monthly costs for National City at $2,844.00 per month, and,
Imperial Beach to $1,432 per month (which includes the increased
level of services). Current monthly fees are $2,567.00 for
National City and $1,222.00 for Imperial Beach.
In fiscal year 1992-93 staff intends to consider a full cost
recovery formula in the development of these contracts. In this
regard, it must be recognized that with both Imperial Beach and
National City, we are competing with the San Diego County Animal
Shelter for the provision of these services.
FISCAL IMPACT: The proposed agreement's amendments will generate
$51,312 in revenue for FY 1991-1992.
C\..~
RESOLUTION NO. I~~~~
DRAFT
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA RATIFYING FOURTH AMENDMENT TO
AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY FOR
USE OF THE CHULA VISTA ANIMAL SHELTER, AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, Chula Vista provides animal shelter services
for the City of National City; and
WHEREAS, this agreement is being renewed to continue
providing this service for FY 1991-92.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula Vista does hereby ratify the Fourth Amendment
to Agreement between the City of Chula Vista and the City of
National City providing for the use of Chula Vista's Pound
Facilities and Services, a copy of which is on file in the office
of the City Clerk.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the Ci ty of
Chula Vista be, and he is hereby authorized and directed to
execute said Amendment for and on behalf of the City of Chula
Vista.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
William J. Winters
Police Chief
itvL~ V\-J_
Bruce M. BOOgaa~
City Attorney
9165a
Qr;.,/4A-!
DRAFT
FOURTH AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AND THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY
PROVIDING FOR THE USE OF CHULA VISTA'S POUND
FACILITIES AND SERVICES
THIS FOURTH AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT, made and entered
into this day of , 1991, by and between the
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a municipal corporation hereinafter called
"Chu1a Vista" and the City of National City, hereinafter called
"National City."
WIT N E SSE T H
WHEREAS, the City of National City desires to use the pound
facilities of the City of Chu1a vista as a shelter for the
impounding and disposing of dogs and small animals, and
WHEREAS, the City of Chu1a Vista has pound facilities
adequate to serve the needs of the Ci ty of National Ci ty in
addition to the present use by the City of Chu1a vista, and
WHEREAS, the City of National City and the City of Chu1a
Vista entered into an agreement for animal shelter services on July
21, 1987, and have annually amended it thereafter; and,
WHEREAS, the City of National city now desires to again
amend the July 21, 1987 agreement for FY 1991-92 with the City of
Chu1a vista for the use of the pound facilities of the City of
Chu1a Vista as a shelter for the impounding and disposing of dogs
and small animals, and
WHEREAS, Chu1a Vista is willing to amend said agreement in
the manner set forth herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED by and between Chu1a vista and
National City as follows:
A. Paragraph 6 of the Agreement dated July 21, 1987, is
amended to read:
6. Retroactive to July 1, 1991 and extending through
June 30, 1992, National city agrees to pay the
City of Chu1a vista the sum of two thousand, eight
hundred forty-five dollars ($2,844.00) per month for
the aforementioned services and facilities.
qA-3
}
.".)
. .... '.
'~'((:
B. All other terms and conditions of the original agreement,
as amended, remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this
agreement on the date hereinabove set forth.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
CITY OF NATIONAL CITY
Mayor, City of Chula Vista
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
~
Assistant City
q f\ -~
RESOLUTION NO.~
DRAFT
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA RATIFYING FOURTH AMENDMENT TO
AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF IMPERIAL BEACH FOR
USE OF THE CHULA VISTA ANIMAL SHELTER, AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, Chula Vista provides animal shelter services
for the City of Imperial Beach; and
WHEREAS, this agreement is being renewed to continue
providing this service for FY 1991-92.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the Ci ty of Chula Vista does hereby ratify the Fourth Amendment
to Agreement between the Ci ty of Chula Vista and the Ci ty of
Imperial Beach providing for the use of Chula Vista's Pound
Facilities and Services, 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 be, and he is hereby authorized and directed to
execu te said Amendment for and on behalf of the Ci ty of Chula
Vista.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
william J. winters
Police Chief
9164a
qe-I /q~-1.
DRAFT
FOURTH AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AND THE CITY OF IMPERIAL BEACH
PROVIDING FOR THE USE OF CHULA VISTA'S POUND
FACILITIES AND SERVICES
THIS FOURTH AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT, made and entered
into this day of , 1991, by and between the
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a municipal corporation hereinafter called
"Chula vista" and the City of Imperial Beach, hereinafter called
"Imperial Beach."
WIT N E SSE T H
WHEREAS, the City of Imperial Beach desires to use the
pound facilities of the City of Chula Vista as a shelter for the
impounding and disposing of dogs and small animals, and
WHEREAS, the city of Chula vista has pound facilities
adequate to serve the needs of the city of Imperial Beach in
addition to the present use by the City of Chula Vista, and
WHEREAS, the City of Imperial Beach and the city of Chula
Vista entered into an agreement for animal shelter services on July
21, 1987, and have annually amended it thereafter; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Imperial Beach now desires to again
amend the July 21, 1987 agreement for FY 1991-92 with the City of
Chula vista for the use of the pound facilities of the City of
Chula Vista as a shelter for the impounding and disposing of dogs
and small animals, and
WHEREAS, Chula vista is willing to amend said agreement in
the manner set forth herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED by and between Chula vista and
Imperial Beach as follows:
A. Paragraphs 2 and 6 of the Agreement dated July 21,
1987, are amended to read:
2.e.Chula vista agrees to provide emergency animal
control services, limited to the capture and
restraint of vicious loose dogs and the sheltering
of animals where no other alternative exists,
between the hours of 6:00 P.M. and 6:00 A.M..
Trapped wild and domestic animals, dead animal
removal, the removal of animal traffic hazards and
taking of vicious animals already in the custody
of their owners are specifically excluded from this
agreement.
g8~.3
,~
6. Retroactive to July 1, 1991 and extending through
June 30, 1992, Imperial Beach agrees to pay the
City of Chula vista the sum of one thousand, four
hundred, thirty-two dollars ($1,432) per month for
the aforementioned services and facilities.
B. All other terms and conditions of the original
agreement, as amended, remain in full force and
effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this
agreement on the date hereinabove set forth.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
CITY OF IMPERIAL BEACH
Mayor, City of Chula vista
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
-""
q'f6-L{
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item /a/J.....8
Meeting Date 08/13/91
ITEM TITLE
Resolution J (,,']..'1 ip Approving an amendment to agreement
with the City of National City for fire dispatching services.
Resolution , ~ ",-q 1 Approving an amendment to agreement
with the City of Imperial Beach for fire dispatching services.
/
SUBMITTED BY Police c~W
REVIEWED BY City Manager...\Gi ~~ (4/Sths Vote: Yes_No-X..)
Chula Vista currently has contracts with the cities of National City and Imperial Beach to
provide fire dispatching services. The rates for these services are revised annually to reflect
increased salary and support costs.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve both resolutions
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
DISCUSSION:
Chula Vista has bee providing fire dispatching services for National City, Imperial Beach and
Bonita-Sunnyside Fire District for several years. The fee is based on the percentage of fire calls
dispatched for each jurisdiction and applied to the annual cost of the fire dispatching function
as follows:
Chula Vista
National City
Imperial Beach
Bonita
Percent of Fire
Calls Dispatched
52.83%
28.45 %
12.69%
6.03%
Annual Cost
of Fire Dispatching
$186,627
$186,627
$186,627
$186,627
Proposed
Annual Fee
None
$53,095
$23,683
None
Staff has calculated the annual cost to operate the fire dispatch portion of the Communication
Center at $186,627. This estimate is based upon staffing levels required to dispatch fire and
emergency medical calls (see Attachment A). Both National City and Imperial Beach understand
and agree to the methodology used to arrive at this figure.
A single Communications Operator I provides dispatching on a twenty-four hour basis with the
supervision of a I.,ead Communications Operator. Five of each of the aforementioned positions
are necessary to provide year-round, twenty-four hour staffing. Staff has concluded, through
a time measurement study, that the 5.0 Communication Operator I positions spend seventy-eight
/0 -I
Page 2
Item IDA ....8
Meeting Date 08/13/91
per cent (78 %) of their time on fire and emergency medical dispatch responsibilities. The
remainder of their time is spent providing back-up support to the police dispatchers. Each of
the 5.0 Lead Communication Operators spend ten per cent (10%) of their time supervising and
assisting the fire dispatchers.
The disposition of computer dispatch protocol, procedure and policy issues is coordinated by one
of the three Battalion Chiefs and the Communications Systems Manager. Performance of these
duties require approximately ten per cent (10%) of each position's time.
The cost for each agency is based on a weighted percentage of the total calls dispatched for that
agency. The weighting criteria distinguishes between calls requiring less dispatcher time and
calls which demand a relatively significant amount of dispatch time. For instance, commercial
and residential fires are weighted three times more heavily than courtesy calls and false alarms.
Once again, National City and Imperial Beach understand and agree to the methodology used
to arrive at these figures.
On October 17, 1989, Chula Vista and the Bonita-Sunnyside First District entered into an
agreement that requires Chula Vista to provide fire dispatching services to Bonita-Sunnyside at
no cost through fiscal year 1991-92. This agreement also provided for a three year phase-out
of the payments Chula Vista has been making to Bonita-Sunnyside for free fire protection
services they provide to Chula Vista areas that are contingent to the Bonita-Sunnyside district.
In fiscal year 1992-93 staff intends to consider a full cost recovery formula in the development
of these agreements. In this regard, it must be considered that with both Imperial Beach and
National City, we are competing with the City of San Diego's Public Safety Communications
Center for provision of these services.
FISCAL IMPACT: Total revenue to be received by the City in FY 1991-92 is $76,778, an
increase of 6.06% over FY 1990-91.
/0-1..
COMMUNICATIONS OPERATOR I
Salary
Retirement
Benefits
Worker's Comp
Medicare
Shift Pay
$28,862
3,710
3,620
225
419
835
$37,761 x 5 x .78=
LEAD COMMUNICATIONS OPERATOR
Salary
Retirement
Benefits
Worker's Comp
Shift Pay
BATTALION CHIEF
Salary
Retirement
Benefits
Worker's Comp
$39,009
5,005
3,620
304
835
$48,773 x 5 x .10=
$65,903
17,786
5,068
514
$89,271 x .10=
COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS MANAGER
Salary
Retirement
Benefits
Worker's Comp
Medicare
$51,194
6,561
5,068
399
742
$63,964
x .10=
TOTAL
lo-~
$146,917
$ 24,387
$
8,927
$
6,396
$186,627
Attachment A
RESOLUTION NO. )(, ~q c...
DRAFT
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VI STA APPROVING AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND THE CITY
OF NATIONAL CITY FOR FIRE DISPATCHING
SERVICES, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE
SAID AGREEMENT
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula Vista that that certain Amendment to the
Agreement between the City of Chula Vista and the City of
National City for fire dispatching services, dated the day
of , 1991, a copy of which is on file in the office of the
City Clerk, be, and the same is hereby approved.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the Ci ty of
Chula Vista be, and he is hereby authorized and directed to
execute said Amendment for and on behalf of the City of Chula
Vista.
Presented by
A([A
Bruce M. Boogaa
City Attorney
or:>>
william J. winters
Police Chief
9162a
JoA-1
DRAFT
FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AND THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY
PROVIDING FOR FIRE DISPATCHING SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of
, 1991, by and between the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a
municipal corporation hereinafter called "Chula vista" and the City
of National City, hereinafter called "National City."
WIT N E SSE T H
WHEREAS, the City of National City has contracted with the
City of Chula vista for the provision of Fire Dispatching Services;
and,
WHEREAS, this agreement provides for the City of Chula vista
to determine the exact monthly cost of these services for each
fiscal year; and,
WHEREAS, the ci ty of National City desires to amend the
current agreement with the City of Chula Vista for the provision of
fire dispatching services in fiscal year 1991-1992; and,
WHEREAS, the Chula vista is willing to amend said agreement in
the manner set forth herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED by and between Chula Vista and
National City as follows:
A. Section 5 of the Agreement dated September 25, 1990, is
amended to read:
The City of National City hereby agrees to pay the
sum of $ 4,424.59 per month in quarterly payments.
The first payment to be made on or before October
1, 1991-
B. All other terms and conditions of the original agreement
remain inn full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed agreement on
the date hereinabove set forth.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
CITY OF NATIONAL CITY
ATTEST:
loA ..z.
DRAFT
RESOLUTION NO. It- "l..Ct 1--
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND THE CITY
OF IMPERIAL BEACH FOR FIRE DISPATCHING
SERVICES, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE
SAID AGREEMENT
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula Vista that that certain Amendment to the
Agreement between the City of Chula Vista and the City of
Imperial Beach for fire dispatching services, dated the day
of , 1991, a copy of which is on file in the office of the
City Clerk, be, and the same is hereby approved.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the Ci ty of
Chula Vista be, and he is hereby authorized and directed to
execute said Amendment for and on behalf of the City of Chula
Vista.
Presented by
ruce M. Booga
City Attorney
William J. Winters
Police Chief
9163a
I/)i! ..I
DRAFT
FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AND THE CITY OF IMPERIAL BEACH
PROVIDING FOR FIRE DISPATCHING SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of
, 1991, by and between the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a
municipal corporation hereinafter called "Chula vista" and the City
of Imperial Beach, hereinafter called "Imperial Beach."
WIT N E SSE T H
WHEREAS, the City of Imperial Beach has contracted with the
City of Chula vista for the provision of Fire Dispatching Services;
and,
WHEREAS, this agreement provides for the City of Chula Vista
to determine the exact monthly cost of these services for each
fiscal year; and,
WHEREAS, the city of Imperial Beach desires to amend the
current agreement with the City of Chula vista for the provision of
fire dispatching services in fiscal year 1991-1992; and,
WHEREAS, the Chula vista is willing to amend said agreement in
the manner set forth herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED by and between Chula vista and
Imperial Beach as follows:
A. Section 5 of the Agreement dated September 25, 1990, is
amended to read:
The City of Imperial Beach hereby agrees to pay the
sum of $ 1,973.59 per month in quarterly payments.
The first payment to be made on or before October
1, 1991.
B. All other terms and conditions of the original agreement
remain inn full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed agreement on
the date hereinabove set forth.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
CITY OF IMPERIAL BEACH
ATTEST:
IO~ -2-'
------_....----_......,.,~~.~,.__....._._- ._~^~~.._~^-,'_.-
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item -1L
Meeting Date 8-13-91
Jl.~'li'
ITEM TITLE: Resolution Supporting City of San Diego's effort to seek a
legislative remedy to avoid converting Point Lorna Sewage
Treatment Plant from Primary to Conventional Secondary and
agreeing to share in the cost.
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works rp1J/'
REVIEWED BY: City Manager jG ~7~\
O~
(4/Sths Vote: Yes_NoLl
Chula Vista has been represented by Councilman Moore on the Clean Water Program
Governance Advisory Group (GAG) since early 1990. The purpose of this group is to advise
the City Council of San Diego on how the Participating Agencies want THE CLEAN WATER
PROGRAM (known also as METRO II and the sewer upgrade program) to be managed, owned
and financed. This report will give the Council a status report and make a recommendation on
whether Chula Vista should approve of San Diego seeking relief from converting Point Lorna
from its current treatment process of Advanced Primary (approximately 75 % removal of solids)
to Secondary (approximately 85 % to 90% removal of solids).
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Resolution agreeing to seek relief from converting Point Lorna to Secondary Treatment.
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS: None
DISCUSSION:
Background
Since 1961 Chula Vista has been involved in a Contract with the City of San Diego for the
treatment of sewage. The City of San Diego owns all the facilities to treat the sewage, however,
each Member Agency, (ie Chula Vista) pays for treatment costs based on the amount of flow,
and is also paying off Bonds for the Point Lorna Plant based on our capacity rights. This system
worked well for the region for 26 years. The Point Lorna Treatment Plant is classified as an
\ \ - \
Page 2, Item II
Meeting Date 'R - '3 - q {
Advanced Primary Treatment Plant. It removes 75 % of the solids as sludge, and deposits the
remainder of the sewage into the ocean. Federal Law (adopted after Pt. Loma was built) has
a mandatory requirement that the minimum standard for sewage treatment shall be Secondary
Treatment which removes 85 % to 90 % of solids, and uses a biological process to remove BOD
(Biological Oxygen Demand). San Diego was working on an application for a waiver from
secondary standards, when in 1987 the City Council of San Diego voted, without input from the
Participating Agencies, to drop the application for a waiver. This meant that the Region was
in a position to convert from Primary Treatment to Secondary Treatment at a cost in 1990
dollars of nearly $2 Billion.
Because of that unilateral decision by the City Council of San Diego, the other Participating
Agencies in the Metro I system were upset that such a decision could be made without their
input. A study was conducted by the Management Firm of Touche Ross, which recommended
that the ownership and operation of the Metro system be transferred to another governmental
body involving all the participating agencies. The proposal is for a sanitation district to be
established by the State Legislature which would be a Special Act District (SAD).
To deal with the formation of that new Agency, a Governmental Advisory Group (GAG) was
established in Spring of 1990. The GAG is advisory to the City Council of San Diego and is
composed of one Elected Official from each Participating Agency, one from the City of San
Diego and an appointed member from the County Water Authority. Special Act District (SAD)
City of San Diego Staff have been working with Elected Officials on the Governmental Advisory
Group (GAG) to get the Special Act District (SAD) approved by the legislature in Sacramento.
Senators Killea, Craven, and Deddeh have introduced SB 1225 which would create the San
Diego Waste Water Management District.
The District would be a separate Governmental Agency, created by the State for the Purpose of
owning and operating the Sewage Treatment system for Greater San Diego. The District would
be composed of the areas within the Participating Member Agencies and would be governed by
a Board of Directors composed of Members from the City of San Diego (6), County of San
Diego (2), City of Chula Vista (2), and (1) member from each of the other 9 members Cities
plus the County Water Authority.
The District would have powers to tax, go into debt, and operate as an independent Agency.
It will have the power to Condemn Property, and enter into contracts. All Items will be voted
by a majority of the 19 board members, unless there is a motion by any member to call a
weighted vote. If a member of one Agency calls a weighted vote, one member of another
Agency must second the motion. The weighted vote will be based on flow, with the City of San
Diego having a maximum of 50%, even though they now have nearly 2/3 of the flow.
However, to enter into long term debt, the legislation requires a majority vote of all the
members of the board. (A weighted vote can't be called in this case.)
\\..~
Page 3, Item II
Meeting Date <S - 13 - q J
Point Loma Waiver from Secondary Treatment
The City of San Diego was sued by the Federal EPA, Regional Water Quality Control Board,
and the Sierra Club for past violations and to enter a consent decree to agree on the conditions
and time schedule to convert all Sewage Treatment from Primary to Secondary. Because of
concern for the large cost to convert from Primary to Secondary, and the opinion from Scripps
Scientists that the Ocean Environment would not be significantly enhanced by this huge
expenditure, Judge Brewster has issued a MEMORANDUM DECISION deferring approval of
proposed partial consent decree. The basis of that delay was for several reasons including:
1. Although the City of San Diego was scheduled to build reclamation plants on a timely
basis, there was no commitment to reuse the water. The Judge wanted a plan to use
50% of the water by 2003 and 75% by 2010.
2. Converting Point Lorna to Secondary Treatment will be very costly, while providing only
minimal benefit to the environment. The Judge gave two years for the San Diego to do
further studies, to see if other means, ie Chemical treatment, could work well to protect
the Ocean.
3. Converting Point Lorna Secondary Treatment would double the amount of Sludge that
the region would have to deal with. The City's plan did not have an adequate method,
or at least "beneficial to the public interest" plan to accept this extra sludge.
4. Completion of water conservation ordinances by the City of San Diego may have a
beneficial effect (reduction) on the flows to the Point Lorna Plant. The decree should
be delayed to be able to assess the effect of the water conservation plans.
5. The City of San Diego is planning to extend the Point Lorna outfall to be deeper and
further away from the kelp beds, eliminating the threat to divers in the kelp beds. This
project is still on schedule, will be done even without secondary conversion of the plant,
and will result in a great improvement to the Environment.
San Diego City Council Action (June 25,1991)
After hearing from the staff of the Clean Water Program, the San Diego City Council, voted to
refer future actions relative to waivers to the Governmental Advisory Group (GAG). The GAG
on July 12,1991 asked the staff to write each participating Agency, explaining the options the
City has to reduce the requirements for Point Lorna, and the related costs to the region and make
a decision at the GAG meeting on August 30, 1991.
Councilman Moore, received a letter dated July 22, 1991, from Harriet Stockwell, Chairwoman,
asking that your council consider the item and send a formal reply for the August 30, 1991
meeting.
\\#~
Page 4, Item J I
Meeting Date g - I ~ - cf I
That letter (attached) indicated that an effort to seek relief would cost the region $1 million and
should be shared by the Participating Agencies. The letter also inclosed a report dated June 26,
subject "DISCUSSION OF P ARTIAL WAIVER FOR POINT LOMA". We have three avenues
to pursue relief: 1) Legislative, 2) Judicial and 3) Administrative. The consensus of the experts
is that judicial relief is remote, therefore, CWP staff recommend exploring legislative relief.
Chula Vista staff supports legislative relief as the favored alternative, but advises to keep all
options open should that option fail. We also believe that the cost to pursue the relief is very
cost effective. If we don't pursue the relief, it would cost the region $1 Billion.
Staff has been impressed with the reasonableness of the Courts, even though the Clean Water
Staff and the EPA were ready to agree on Converting Point Lorna at a cost of $1 Billion. Staff
believes it prudent to pursue alternatives, either legislative, judicial, or Administrative
through the EPA, to attempt to save the taxpayers of San Diego region $1 Billion.
FISCAL IMPACT
It is proposed that the costs be split between San Diego and the Participating Agencies based
upon Contracted flow. This would represent a cost to Chula Vista of $82,100. These costs
would be for staff members, and consultants with special expertise in the legal, legislative and
scientific fields. On the other hand, a $1 Billion savings could represent $82.1 million savings
to Chula Vista sewer users if the waiver is granted. This resolution is not appropriating funds,
but merely giving a position to GAG. An appropriation resolution will be coming forward in
the future if the GAG and City of San Diego decide to go forward.
JPL
c:\wp51doc\sad808
\\..L.(
RESOLUTION NO. I~tqf
DRAFT
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA SUPPORTING THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO'S
EFFORT TO SEEK LEGISLATIVE, JUDICIAL, OR
ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES WHICH WOULD AVOID
CONVERTING PT. LOMA SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
FROM PRIMARY TO CONVENTIONAL SECONDARY AND
APPROVING IN PRINCIPLE SHARING IN THE COST
THEREOF
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista has been represented by
Councilman Moore on the Clean Water Program Governance Advisory
Group (GAG) since early 1990-and
WHEREAS, the purpose of GAG is to advise the City
Council of the City of San Diego on how participating agencies
want the Clean Water Program to be managed, owned and financed
WHEREAS, the Pt. Lorna current treatment
advanced primary (removing approximately 75% of
conventional secondary treatment requires the
approximately 85% to 90% of solids, and
process
solids)
removal
is
and
of
WHEREAS, converting Pt. Lorna from advanced primary to
conventional secondary treatment would cost ratepayers in the
Metro Sewer System (including Chula Vista residents)
approximately one billion dollars, and
WHEREAS, Federal District Judge Brewster has issued a
memorandum decision deferring approval of a proposed partial
consent decree providing a delay during which the City of San
Diego can investigate and evaluate reasonable alternatives to
conventional secondary treatment at Pt. Lorna treatment plant
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the Ci ty of Chula Vista does support the Ci ty of San Diego's
effor t to seek al terna te legi sla t i ve judicial or admin istra ti ve
remedies to avoid converting Pt. Lorna's sewage treatment plant
from primary to conventional secondary.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Ci ty of Chula Vista
prefers legislative option #3 listed in the memorandum of San
Diego Deputy City Manager Frauenfelder dated June 26, 1991,
obtaining a legislative remedy which would allow alternate
technology secondary treatment short of "conventional secondary
treatment" at huge cost savings over conventional secondary
treatment while obtaining equal or better environmental results.
\\-<<5
DRAFT
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Ci ty of Chula Vista
supports the efforts to find other legislative, judicial, or
administrative solutions and approves, in principle, financial
support in the amount of $82,100 on behalf of the city of Chula
Vista, with the understanding that the provision of such funds
and support does not constitute a waiver of any potential cause
of action against the city of San Diego on behalf of the City of
Chula Vista or its ratepayers with regard to potential
expenditures for the Metro Sewer System.
Submitted by
Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt
Director of Public works
r~lEl~ ~~
D. Richard Rud
Assistant City Attorney
DRR/bb
9l73a
\ \.-lo
~-, -- _..-..~ ..~~.- ......~---.._--~ ,~...4!!t:.-;.,,--::.--::.~..1!1.~~'.~~'; '."""";.~-"'~\.!=J..;=":4i:.......~;..4!t-""a.."'~u.~~r";''''''-:'_~,;;, I":r" .....c:s-~........tl(,;'-.._~-:~!!"t!
~ .
CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
for Greater San Diego
F1rst Intastate Plaza · 401 T Street. Suite 710 · San D6rgo. CA 92101-4230
Phone: (619) 533-4200 · flIx: (619) 533-4267
Govemance Advisory Group
CbaJrperscn
Hamel Stcc:lmD
Counc:lIIr.c::bc:.
alf orE! Cajon
Vice Chairperson
Brian Cochran
0IwIdImc:::!lc:.
all or l.e::lo:I (j:ll\"c
Members
LInda Brannon
a.rd )fc:bc:.
eounlfWalC:
Authority
Frank 0. Daugherty
a.rd Y.c:bc:.
Padre Dam X\:lId;lIl
.at&: DlsC'!ct
Susan Golding
1upmItor.
County Bean! 01
IupcnfIcn
Jan Caldsmtth
lII",r.
CIlf 01 Pan1
tu-Gray Hill
CDuIIdIn:ccbc:.
CIlf on. )!&sa
Ralph Inzunza
CDund1mcnlbc:'.
CIlf orX.lIona1 Oty
Susan Ring Keith
CIIundlIn=bc:.
CIlforCanna.
J)eJ Laudncr
a.rd Xcmbcr.
0ta1 VlItIr DlIll".cl
_ McMtDan
c..,~k.
, CIt1 orDcUIar
tIonard Moore
~.
CIlJ or CbuIa V'.a:a
.Jay RDbbtns
ClundJrnm:bcr.
CIlJ " IIDpctIJ Beach
JIlIn RDberts
ClIurIdImcmbe:.
alf orSu DIc&o
July 22, 1991
..
d .1'\ ,="
e.~ 'E"";
- 0::1.
· ~ 'f" ""I'"
r ('\ () 1:'1
~ ~-;.~
- -~,
~ f- t1'
O'P'\J
1i o~
ell c; u;
-'"'-
.~,v
At the July 12, 1991 meeting of the Clean Water Program
Governance Advisory Group, the City of San Diego
requested a recommendation from the membership regarding
whether or not a waiver ,of secondary treatment
requirements should be sought for the Point Loma
Wastewater Treatment Plant. The enclosed memorandum
served as the basis of discussion.
Mr. Leonard Moore
Councilmember - Chula Vista
P.O. Box 1087
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear ~~,
In order for the Governance Advisory Group to make a
clear and considered recommendation to the City, I am
asking each of you to take the issue to your councils and
boards. If your agency wishes to pursue relief for the
Point Loma Plant, you should bring back a formal
endorsement of the efforts outlined in the attachment.
Your agency will also need to state its position on
paying its proportionate share of the costs (based on
contracted capacity) if it wishes to proceed with this
effort. As stated in the attachment the cost of.pursuing
a waiver application would be approximately $1 million.
Of the options outlined in the attachment, the city of
San Diego is recommending legislative rather than
administrative or judicial changes, due to the
potentially, higher costs and protracted effort of the
latter. Of the legislative options, the City. feels that
a specific recommendation for amendments to the Clean
Water Act, for instance, at this time is premature,
because the legislative route is highly dependent on the
receptivity of the legislators who will consider it.
'!'he City feels that the effort should be flexible at this
point, guided by inquiries at the Washington level
regarding approach and language.
\\ ..1
~~-~-,..."~-_.,,..,~.."'_._-~.~.~,~,-,.--"~~.-,._..._----"~---
,.
'.
.;
;overnance Advisory Group
July 22, 1991
Page 2
I look forward to seeing you at the next Governance
Advisory Group meeting on August 30, 1991. '!'his issue
will be an action item on the agenda. I hope that you
will be able to bring forward a recommendation from your
agency regarding both whether or not to pursue relief of
Point Lema and if so, your agency's position on sharing
the costs of the effort.
HS:pag
\ \ ~ ~
Sincerely,
~~
HARRIET STOCKWELL
Chairperson
CITY OF SAN DIEGO
MEMORANDUM
..
~
Date: June 26, 1991
To: Governance Advisory Group
Fron: Deputy city Manager Frauenfelder
subject: DISCUSSION OF P~~TIAL WAIVER FOR POINT LOY~.
~ction Reauested
The San Diego city council has requested staff to seek a reco~uen-
dation from the Governance Advisory Group as to whether or not the
city (and later the San Diego Area Wastewater Management District)
should pursue legislative changes that could le~d to the preserva-
tion of the point Lorna treatment plant at advanced primary. This
'iten has been placed on the July 12, 1991 agenda of the Advisory
Group.
In addition, the council asked that in the event that the recommen-
dation is to proceed with such an effort,the Governance Advisory
Group make an affirmative statement that the member agencies will
share proportionately in the cost.
At this time the council is asking for a conceptual recommendation
of whether or not to explore the options available, and conceptual
agreement to share in the as yet unquantified costs.
~ackaround
Recent rulings in federal court (Attachment A) have raised the
issue of whether or not the city of San Diego, as the current owner
and operator of the Metropolitan Sewerage system, should seek a
partial waiver from the secondary sewage treatment requirements
mandated by the Clean Water Act. Such an effort would be trans-
ferred to the San Diego Wastewater Management District upon its
fonuation.
waiver Analvsis Assumptions
Three assumptions have been made in undertaking this analysis:
1) The city would pursue a partial waiver. Point lroma would
treat 240 mgd of sewage using the advanced primary treatment
currently in use. All State Ocean Plan requirements would be
met, including bacteriological standards that will be met with
the extension of the outfall. The only exemptions requested
would be for total suspended solids and biological oxygen
demand (BOD) removals. The 90 mgd of capacity above what
\\..q
Governance Advisory Group
June 26, 1991
Page 'I-wo
\
\
would be possible if secondary treatment were required will
eliminate the need for both the secondary treatment and wa~er
reclamation plants at the Dairy Mart Road site, and the Santee
water reclamation plant. The balance of the region's waste-
water flows will be treated at the Poway, North City, Mission
Valley, Mission Gorge, and Otay water reclamation plants.
(Attachment B shows what the system would leok like.) The
savings that would be realized under such a scenario would
total as much as $1 billion in capital costs and about $10-$15
nillion each year in operational costs (Attachment C).
2)
Planning, design and construction of all projects would
continue on the schedule established in the consent decree.
3)
The land that is needed" to implement Alternative IV as
co~"itted to in the consent decree would be acauired whether
or not a waiver is sought or obtained. This wili preserve the
option of implementing secondary treatment in the future.
ootions for Lecrislative Chancre
As this decision has legal, financial and operational implications
the city Manager and City Attorney used both in-house and outside
sources to analyze the options. The consensus of the experts is
that judicial relief, (i.e. challenging EPA in court to accept ar.d
subsequently approve a waiver application) seelLlS remote. Therefore
staff is prelirninar"ily exploring lecrislati ve options.
The Clean Water Act' is undergoing reauthorization in the Congress
with the Senate considering S.1081 and the House expected to begin
drafting "a bill this surr~er (1991). Since legislation is still
being formulated the city could pursue one of the following
options:
1. San Diego, working with the participating agencies, the Gover-
nor's Office, and the congressional delegation, would work to
amend the Clean Water Act to allow an exclusion for San Diego
based on its uniqueness. It could be based, for example, on
discharge' to" open coa'stal waters exceeding 300 foot depth
where swiftly moving currents oxygenate and disperse the
effluent.
2. The Clean Water Act could be amended to allow new applications
to be submitted under Section 301(h). In light of the city's
decision to withdraw its waiver application in February 1987,
and of the Act's December 1982 deadline for filing applica-
tions, this amendment would allow San Diego to submit a ne~
waiver .application.
\\..\0
~.
Gove=nance Advisory Group
June 26, ~99~
Page Three
3. The Clean Water Act could be amended to provide for tlmarine
secondary treatment" for coastal discharges, requiring 75%
suspended solids removal, but eliminating the BOD standard as
not relevant to open coastal waters.
These legislative efforts could be based on some or all of the
following conditions:
~.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Extension of the outfall at Point Lorna.
completion is. June 1994. CUrrent cost
Dillion.
Planned date of
estimate: $150
I!noroved susoended solids and BOD removals at Point Lo~a.
Piiot studie~ are due to be completed in January 1993. The
cost estimate for ongoing improved removals (chemicals,
disposal of additional sludge) will depend on the results of
the study.
Improved pretreatment program, system-wide. A wide range of
improvements could be implemented, with annual costs of about
$1 million.
operation of five water reclamation facilities (Poway, North
city, Mission Valley, Mission Gorge, and otay).
Installation of water conserving hardware to reduce raw set.tlage
flows. A $500,OOOjyear program for the next five years has
been suggested by Judge Brewster as a cr~dit project to offset
the $3 million penalty assessed by ~he court.
6.
Continuation of parallel planning.
In addition, the current regulations under which the city would
apply for a waiver, (if still required under any newly adopted
legislation) require extensive scientific data on the biological,
chemical and physical condition of the marine environment.
preparation of the application, based on a one-year effort, is
estimated to cost about $1 million.
;t( R ~~'~1'~
H. R. FRAUENFELDfR .
FDS:SCH:bej
Attac;h:ments
(MAYOit3.SCH)
\\ -\\
20 I
..n......c.~u~_'u,~ .n.
2
31
l .
- J
I
5
6:
..
I
81
!):
101
. I
"~t~~~ ~ ~ f&m
j'
CLERK U S DiSTRICT COUF.T
sotiiHERN DISTRICT OF CA!JFO~~;:A ",
. 6Y .... ..-:.: ~:.:-... ...- tE?crrt"
..-.. -.---.-
UNITED ST;...TES DISTRIC::r. COURT
26 / / I /
2i I / / / /
28 / / / /
SOUTn2?~ DISTRICT OF CAL!FO?~IA
UNITED STATES OF }.,HERICA and
1J STATE OF C~L!FORNIA,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
) .
)
. )
)
)
)
I
]2d
"'1 . ~ 1 - -
. 2,12'11... !!S,
Civil No. SB-llOl-E(IEG)
MEHOR1.NDlJM DECIS!ON
DE?ER~ING APPROVAL O?
FROPOSED P).RTIA!. CO~iS:::NT
DECREE
In considering ~laintiffs' motion for entry of the
\\"'\"l-,
tn:o-=csec.
. -
21 partial consent decree (Decree),. this court has conducted a
22 hearing in wr~ch the parties have presehted evidence on the issue
23 IOf whether the Decree is in the public interest. In additicn,
13
vs.
14. CITY OF SAN DIEGO,
15i
I
I
Defendant.
24 the court has allowed ~ny interested citizens to provide public
16
S!E?~ CLUB, L~ILY Du~3IN, end
i7 ERUCE HENDER~ON,
181
19
Intervenors.
'25 co~~e~t, in writing or in open court, concerning the Decree ~nd
..
-.. _....... ...~U..t:'............ '-".4 ....10-... ""'..-......-..,,- lJ.... ~U....l LI':'C':;\,J.
U'y\Jll ~U!l~.lOera~~cn 0:
~ th~ evidence and the public comment discussed abovs, the cc~rt
3 hereby enters the following memorandum decisicn.
41
lr'
~I
~I
01
1~1
~rocedural Backc~OUDd
hi' ...J b h.L. b Lh Y' .. . C'" ~
T s ~s an ec~~cn roug.~ Y L e cnl~ea -~a~es
f ~ '
o .~n:rlca
(United states) and the state of california (state)
against the
city of San Diego (City) to require the city to cOEply with
t.r:e
Clean l'iater Act (Act), 33 U.S.C. S 1251 et ~eC'., and wit~ its
National Pollutant Discharge Eliminatio~ Syste~ pernit, anc ~o
11 require the city to pay civil penalties f~r past violetio~s of
12 the Act. The Sierra Club, Emily Durbin, and Bruce Henderson have
13 been granted leave to interven~ in this action.
]4 On May 10~ 1989/ the court bifurceteo this case into
15 rsruedial and penalty phases. On January 30, 1990, the Unit=c
161 states, the state, and the City lodged the Decree with thE ccu~t/
li' thereby settling the re~edial phase 9f this case, subject to
18 approval by the court. By Interim Order dated March 21, 1~90,
19 this court found the Decree to be approp~iate action tc achieve
20 compliance with the Clean Water Act, end plaintiffs were
21 permitted to publish notice of the Decree in the Federal
22' Register, as required by law.
23 On August 15, 1990, after publication of the Decree anc upon
24: review of the public co~~ent received, plaintiffs moved for entry
25 ot jud~ent approving end ordering performence of the Decree. Ey
26
S This public cOn"L!i\ent was received at 'th~ r~qu~st Of the
2i court. and SUDPlemented the lJublic cotnnient. alreadv Y'p.c:ei. ved hv 'th~ ,-
covernment in response to the legally mandated publication ot the
28 Decree in the Federal Register.
\ \.. l.3
2
..
. --. - r ---- -----, ~....-..,...__.,~ ~\J .........:!:.
2 equitable euthority with respect to the Decree}:deferred .
3 consideration of the Decree so th~t evidence .could be presented
~ as to whether pursuit of a ~ 301(h) waiver by the city wo~ld ~e
I
5 i in the public interest. 2 By Amended Memorandun Decision cate=
I
6 !April 18, 1991, the court ruled that it would not defer
i consideration of the Decree in order to allow the City to
c-=.~l yo
.. -
8 for a waiver.) Accordingly, the court stated its intentiorl to 0
9 consider forthwith whether the Decree is in the public
I
I
10 I and should therefore be entered as a final judgiM~nt. 4
. ~- -_.:..
ln~:::r=~~
:1]
121 II.
13
1'- I enter
- I
I,. I ~ .
o I ~alr,
Scone of Rev i eT,..~
The Ninth Circuit has help the.t II~ district court should
a proposed consent judgment if the court aecides that it is
reasonable and equitable, end does not violate the la~ or
16 public policy. II p.ierr~ Club v. Ele~trord.c Controls Desicn, S09
1.., F.2M1350J 1"::.5;:;' (9thC_io"-_oolQ_90). ~ ~ 4: .
~ v ~ nowever, enLry o~ a consen~
] 8 cecree "is a judicial act which deserves 1nore than the court's
190 rubber 0 stamp on the agency's acticn.u Unitea states v. Ketchikan
20 Pulp Co. 1 430 F.Supp. 83, 85 (D. Alaska 1977) 0
21
221
231 2 If obtained} such a waiver would exempt the City from
comoliance with the: secondary treat~ent requirements of the Clean
2~ water Act at the Point Loma plant} thereby dramatically'aftect!ng
the terms of the Decree.
25
, Si~ultaneously, the court resolved the penalty phase of
26 this action by imposing ~ penalty of $3 ~illion against the City.
2;.1 4 The court's rulina on this iS5UP. din ~n~ ~n"-~r.'n~= ~na
City's pursuit of a waiver while consideration of the Decree
28 proceeded. ~ Amended Melilorandum Decision} p. 5 n. 3.
. :3
\\..l'-\
~II ext~n:iv:-~::~:~:e -~: ::~~:- t:"d:~::iJ~::-~h:~:e:-::: ::::-~:-~: in
81 the ~ublic interest and furthers the objectives of the Clean
- .
4 w~ter Act. while the court" is mindful that it should not
5 "tinkerll with the quasi-contractual e.gree!i\ent of the litigants I
6 it is likewise imperative that the p~rtie5 recognize and consider
7 the substential and long-term effect the Decree will have on the
S Iciti2ens of San Diego. Although i~~edi~te entry of a ccr.sens~al
9 agreement nay be legally and politic~lly expedient, the public
10 interest demands that this court make a se~rching inquiry in~o
1] possible alternative solutions where obvious sho=tcomings exist
)2 in the Decree.
)3
1~
_ III.
1he Decree end the Public IntE~e5t
15
The Decree reflects an i~pressive legal end scientific
16 effort by 'the parties to .iden~ify end solve the sewage\pro~le~s
17 c~=rently confronting the city. . In all likelihood, the Decree
18 woul~ take the city through the twenty-first century and serve as
19 a model for other ~unicipalities attempting to comply with the
20 Act. However, the court has identified four ere~s of concern
21 ~hich indicate that approval of the Decree in its present fc~
22 should be deferred.
23
A.
~eneficial Reuse of ~eclaiPled Water
2~ The Decree contemplates the construction of water
25 recla~ation plants on an aggressive schedule, but feils to
26 require reuse of the reclaimed water on even a lUinimally
sicnificant basis until well after the plants have been
I -
2;.
28\
.
1
\\;\E>
4
.0
----4 - - . -... -', ---
---\
.., -........ ... -- ;,;-.--_..- -- .........~---.~..~
2 water lnay be pumped out to sea,. and increasingly' valuable :pot~ble.
S ~ater will be used in its place. While the con~tructi~n of the
~ reclaimed water plants is laudable, the level of beneficial re~se
5 contemplated by the p~rtiDs is woefully inadequ~te, .and is not in
6 the public interest..
..
I
Based upon the evicence received during the hearing,
~.~ -
'-.. -
8 court concludes that the following schedule and lsvels of r~~5=
I
I
9 arG logistic~lly feasible I sconomically 'preferable I and in the
10 public interest: .(1) u?on the completion of ~ny tsrtiary
11 'treatment plant, the city shall i~Eciately provide for the
121 beneficial reuse of at le~st 25% of the reclaimEd water frc~ that
13 I plant; (2) by Decew~sr 31, 200~, the city shall provide for the
.14 beneficial reuse of at least 50% of all recl~imed water
. ~
prc::\1cea
15 lat the completed plants; ~nd (3) by December 31, 2010, the City
16
17
18
19
20
21
22 .
, The court recognizes that under the Act the parties did
23 not have to provide for the use of ~ny of the reclainec water.
However, this court's review of the Decree is not limited only to
24 those as~ects which are legally nandated. The Supreme Court has
observed- that ,ull federal court is not necessarily barred fron
25 entering e. consent decree merely . because the decree provides
broader relief than the court could have a~arded after s. trial.1I
26 J-ocal 93. Int'1 ~.ss'n of Fi'!'efiahters r ~FL-C:rO. v. citv' of
I Cleveland, ~78 u.s. 501, 519 (1986). Given this statement of the
2i law , it lI\us"t follow th~t the court is required to revie',,;. ~~l
component.s of the agreement, not m~rely those that satisfy expllclt
28 regulatory imperatives.. . .
. , All of the tertiary facilities will be cOlilpleted by 1999.
As presently written, the- Decree contemplates the following
schedule and levels of reuse: (1) by DGcenber 31, 2003, the city
shall beneficially reuse no less than 30,000 acre feet per yea~ of
reclaimed water; end (:2) by December 31, 2010, the city s~'lall
beneficially reuse no less th~n 50% of the wastewater r~ceiving
tertiary treat~ent (presently calculated et 49,800 ecre feet).
\\.,llt,
5
) shall increes~"~t~ beneficial" reuse level to'75%.' . If the City.
"~
2 pledged to ~eet'these levels, any failure to do so ~ay ~e excused
3 upon a showing of go~d cause.
~
B.
point Lcm~ Treatment 09ticns
5 The court received evidence during the hearing indicating
6 ,that physical-chemical treatment solutions ~ay obviate the neec
i for the biological treat~ent prograb p=esently conte~platE~ ~y
8 " the Decree. The City has stated its intention to conduct E plant
9' scale pilot prograb which will test the ebility of the physlcal-
10 jChenical treatment option to meet the regulatory requirenents of
I
1] I the Act ~t the Point Lome plant. If such ~ progran is
12 s~ccessful, the city ~ay adapt the Point Loma plant so that the
13 soals of the Act are ~chieved at ~axi~um savings to the citizens
14 of San Dieg~. a At the very least} the public interest de::anc:.s
15 that the court not blindly IIrubber-ste~pfl the Dscree before ~n= '
16 results of the program ~re evaluated.
17
c.
~luqae
18 Evidence presented during the hearing indicated that the
191 city is presently.reusing 100% of the sludge produced by the
20 Point Loma plant. HoweverJ under the present terms of the
21 Decree, the sludge produced by the city at Poi~t Loma and the new
22 plants is likely to double. Despite this precipitou~ increasE in
23
26
, The court notes that the City is presently preparing a
24 ~a5ter plan for beneficial reuse of reclai~ed water. By deferring
a':)'Oroval . of the Decree, the court hopes that t.~e City will be
25 afforded an opportunity, via the n~ster plan, to alleviate the
court's concerns with respect to bene!icial reuse.
· The presently contemplated secondary treatment option. is ..1-
2; the lnost expensi Va cOlilponen~ of the Decree, ~nd has been 't.he
I"subject OL v1gorous attack by Intervenor Henderson, ~embers 0: the
281 public, and expert witnesses.
\\'-\1 6 ."
..o.,~,,,.,,,,_,_;~,,,"",~._.>>_._'''-_'_'~__
--. "_..,,"._~--,..-._,._~_..,._-,,"~.,~--~~
2 corresponding incr~ase in 1"eus'~~ ..' Giv~n .the inherent difficul;ies t
S ~5sociatec with the reuse of sludge the court cannot 'find
,a.. ,
. ~~
_..-
4 Decree in the public interest without a viable sludge plan which
..
5 coes not depend on the already overburdened landfills of this
6. county.
~
I
D.
Water Conservation
8 In ~ssessing penalties against the city fer past violations
Oi:cr the Act, the court offered the City a water conservatiou
10. F~ogram option which could potentially create a credit in the
11 city's f~vor of $2.5 million. In oraer to ~vail itself of this
12 option, ~e city is required to pass certain ordinances
whic:;
13 could dramatically increc~e wa~er conservation, thereby
recucina
"
14 the number of gallons of waste~.,ater treated by the~i ty.
ThE
"
15 deadline imposed by the court for the pas~age of these'ordin~~=es ~
16 is January 1, 1992.
17 The pecree, because it was drafted prior to this court'i
.
18 inposition of penalties, does not contemplate the potential
19 passage of these ordinances I no~ the subst~ntial effect they ~ay
20 h~ve on the city's compliance with the J..ct.' The court re~ains
21 hopeful th~t the city will act responsibly and progressively in
22 p~ssing the suggested ordinances. Tharefore, approval of the '
23 Decree should be deferred so that the city has an opportunity to
24 do so.
25 / / / /
26
, Likewise, the Decree predates this court's ruling on i:.he :
2; Point Lema outfall extension and therefore also does not r-
lncorpora~e ~he positive impaot that remed~al effort is expected
28 to have on the ~arine environment, particularly in the kelp beds.
7
.'
\\... \~
.
.
" . I'
. . t"l
j,
As noted above, the court's earlier refusal to. defer
3; consideration of the Decree was without 'prejudice to the city
4 lincependently seeking a ~ 301(h) w:lver during the pencency of
51 this ~ction.
I
I
6 ie~phasized that the ability of the City to obtain a waiver ~ay be
In light of the above analysis, it should be
7 significantly enhanced by the treatEe~t inprcvenents and wate~
8 ilccnservation Edv~ncenents contemplatEd in this ME~orandu~
D Decision,
I
10 I SpecificallYI the following events pay lene'i~portant
11 Icredibility to any future waiver application: (1) publication of
12 : pro~ising paster plan for the beneficial reu~e of reclai~cd
13 waterj (2) creation of treatne~t innovctions arising out of the
14 nlant scale oilot prcgra~; (3) enactme~t of ~at5r conservation
- .
15 ordinances by the city, thereby reducing the volune of ~ast=water
16 .a.. d .L.a..' ~,. - ,. (~)" '&"'fl.' z: "l'
It~ee~e C~ ~ne .o~n~ Lo~a p_an~i ~ lcen~l ~ca~lon o~ a s_ucqe
17 ~enageroent progra~ which maximize? beneficial reuse ~nd ~inini2es
18 adverse environmental impacts; end (5) co~pletion of the Point
lD Lorna outfall extension.
20 If the City is cble to marshal its scientific resources ,nd
21 political will towards these objectives, then the court strongly
22 believe~ that compelling and meritorious grounds would exist for
23 a waiver application by the City .1: Moreover, if a consent cecree
24 were entered with the above i~provements, the court concluces
25
26 10 However, this conclusion goes only to ~he merits of the
~n~lication. ~he court 2cknowledges plaintiffs' contention that
'27 procedural obstacles may prevent r:ons; nF.'r;:;ti nt\ nf ~,~~h =n
applica~ion. This ~ourt makes no finding en the merits of that
28 contentJ.on.
\\-\'1
s
..
-1 that ~he citY's.prograrn of integrated water use ~nd sewage
. .
2 treatment would repr~sent a ~~del of economic efficiency, water
3 conservation, and 6nviron~ental protection.
'.
4 Based upon all of the ~bove, the court concludes that the
5 public interest would best be served by' ceferring approval of the
6 Decree. U In aoing so, the court is hop~ful that the partie~ \o:i11
i take advantage of the opportunity to DGet the recuirements of the
8 Act in a cost-efficient and environnent~lly cc~prehensive ~~~~er.
D
10 V.
II
~ondition~ of D~feYr21
During the perioc of deferred approval, the City shalf
12 continue to perform under the Decree to the sans extent as if the
13 court had approved the Decree in its tot~lity. All relevant
14 milestones and deadlines shall be net by the city . confornz.nce
l.n
15 \'~i th the terrr:s of the Decree. 12 Further, the City shall "..... .. .
cv;o:,?.!. e~=
16 its lnaster plan for beneficial reuse of recl~ir:1ed water end
li
1~ A deferral of ap~roval should not be confused with the
18 court's earlier decision concarning deferr~l of consideration.
Most importcntly, the inquiries t1~de by the court in the two
'101 situations are dr~matically different. In deciding \l1hether to'
I defer consideration, the court explored ~erely whether the present
2~ Point Lom" outfall was causing significant harm to the l!!arine
environment, in thE limited context Of ! potential ~~iver
21 ~o~licatioh. In contrast, the court's decision to defer ~~~rcva1
required an analysis of all ~spects of the Decree from a bro~cer
221 perspective. Fundamentally, deferral of approval suggests general
satisfaction with the Decree, subject to certain modifications.
23 . .
12 However, if the city enacts the water. conservation
24 ordinQnces described in this court's Amended MEmorandu~ Decision
of April 18, 1991, the court will allow the City to cefer
25 comoliance ,,;i th the milestone contsmplated by S VI.A .1. c of the
Decree for design of the South Bay secondary treatment plant. If
26 ordered, this dGferral shall r~ma1n in place until such ti~e as
the court has bad 2h opportunity to evaluate the results of the
27 plant scale pilot program at Point Lema, in eporoximatelv Januarv,
1993. sucn deferral would not extend to the design milestone for
28 the South Bay tertiary l'lant. , ".
\ \ '* l-wO
9
."
.--.--- _u_ ----- ..__u - --r.J ow... ...-......... ..U~~.L:t1 L.ut:: \';~l.:y sna..!..L
- '.; ..... .~.
.. .. . ,
2 CO~uenca the pl~nt scale pilot test"" e.t the .point . Loma plant end
S provide the court with at least quarterly updates concerning
"
4 S~!i\e.
5 To ensure co~pliance with these conditionsl the court ~ill
6 held a status conference on Novernber 201 19911 et 2:00 p.n, or ~t
7 such earlier date as circumstances ~ay require.
81, IT
0
10 DATED:
31
32
13
1~
15
16
: 17
18
. 19
20
21
22i
23
24
251
20
2i.
281
i
IS SO ORDERED.
{-(Frc;/
~1J~
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
. ,
""
.....
\ \... J..\
10
."
Civ. No. 88-1101 ;
2 Memorandu~ Decision Deferring Approval of Proposeq Partiel '
Consent D=crae
----...-... .. '-':'''''' .UJ.. Ltefl V!E-CO
3
GER)~D F. GEORGE, Esq.
~~EN S. DWOP~IN, Esq.
Environmental Enforcement Section
u.s. Department of Justice
P.o. Box 7611
Ben Franklin Station
Washington, D.C. 200~~
DAVID EISSLER, Esq.
Deputy Attorney General
3580 Wilshire Boulevard
Los Angeles, CA 90010
DAVID FOOLE, Esq.
Pepper, Ha~ilton, & Scheetz
444 South Flower street
19th Floor
Los AngelGs, CA 90017
TED BROH?IELD, Esq.
202 C street, 3rd Floor
San Diego, CA 92101
ROBERT S!~n10NS, Esq.
U.S.D. School of Law
P.O. Box 19932
San-Diego, CA 92119
WILLI~~! M. EENJ.~~IN, Esq.
Benjamin & sutton
The Ch~tiber BUilding, Suite 2020
110 West C street
San Diego, CA 92101
J.!A...tt.'{ S. PULLIAM, Esg.
701 B"street, Suite 2100
San Diego, CA 92101-8197
:
\\... 'i.J- 11
;
6/20/91
CAPITAL COST SAVINGS OF WAIVER ALTERNATIVE
,
J
Secondary Treatment Facilities
Point Lorna
289.8
South Bay
202.5
63.0
Secondary Sewers
Upstream Treatment Facilities
Poway
o
North City
o
Santee Basin
164. 9
Otay Valley
o
o
o
~!ission .Gorge
Nission Valley
South Bay
88.3
Sludqe Facilities
118.8
Outfalls
San Diego River
o
o
South Bay
T'OTAL
$927.3
Notes:
1) The cost savings for Operation and Maintenance, system-
wide, would be $10-15 million per year.
2) Funds already appropriated for land acquisition and pre-
design of the South Bay subsystem total $26.3 million.
\\..)-~
~Iearl vvuler..r"fogram-
. .
Waiver Scenario'-'
Poway Wr.?
.I1:J mli:!
North C::y WRP ~'~0
~
30/45 m;d ~
, s North.rn Sluclge ~"l
...: ~~ Prc=us~ng ",,,
FlICllil/ls ..........
e_ ......
~....,.........,,"
i.~
VP~
".. ~ 5an Diego
.. ,
~ "
~ "-
.. ,
~ "
~ ~
~ ~...............,"
~ \ "Uulon Ocr;. WRP
~ \ e 7.sl1Sm,d
~ \ ~
// ~~....,.............
, ..........
I
I ~'
~.. MIssIon Valley WRP
7..snS ms;cl
San DIego
County
K!Y
~ T,.o_..1 P10nl
11'I2.... I'N.. V Ph... 2
~ Eaialito; Pump Stallon
. New ~""p Sloton
Eaiallns piper.....
_ New piper.....
e Sluc:'iil 'roc....ln;
"" IWw 5:uc!i" Pipelines
Imperial
Beach
~
Hon.'1
D 1 2 .. I
~
Sulo In MiIM
:
. ..... IU'I'D
.-..-..-
._..-..-..-..-. MElIlCl
JlWC $ecandary Plant 25 noo m;d
\\"'1-\{
.-
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item I z.A....6
ITEM TITLE:
Meeting Date 8-13-91
Reso 1 ut i on I {, 2.. q '1 oJ- I ~3 ()O Approv i ng Uncontro 11 ed Embankment
Agreement for fill at 366-368 Surrey Drive.
Director of Public WorkS'~ ~
City Manager.J"',~ ~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No...!...l
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
Mr. Wadie P. Deddeh has requested permission for an uncontrolled embankment at 366 and
368 Surrey Drive.
According to section 15.04.285 of the Municipal Code, all uncontrolled embankment
agreements must be approved by Council prior to issuance of the grading permit.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the subject resolution, authorize the Mayor to sign the
agreement on behalf of the City and direct the City Clerk to have the resolution and
agreement recorded.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Uncontrolled embankment, as defined in Section 15.04.010 of the Municipal Code, is land
development on which no soil testing was performed or no compaction reports or other
soil reports were prepared or submitted. The appl icant must enter into an agreement
stating that no building permit may be issued for the site until a soil test is
performed and approval is gi ven. The agreement must be approved by Council and then
recorded against the title of the property.
The fill for uncontrolled embankment in this particular case will be used to provide the
foundation for a level parking area in the back of Mr. Deddeh's lot, 368 Surrey Drive.
Fill will be placed on the neighboring lot, 366 Surrey Drive owned by Mr. Takashima, so
that the elevation is consistent among both lots in the area of uncontrolled
embankment. The consistency of elevation will eliminate the need for slopes or
retaining walls at the property line which divides the two lots (see Exhibit A). Mr.
Oeddeh's uncontrolled fill will be covered with A.C. pavement. The neighboring lot's
uncontrolled fill will not.
Approval of the agreement is conditioned as follows:
1. The fill deposited shall be designated as an uncontrolled
embankment and constructed per the approved plan and permit.
2. The developer acknowl edges that the site is not e 1 i gi b 1 e for a
bu il ding permit.
3. The site work shall be done and maintained in a safe and sanitary
manner at the cost of the owner or his successors in interest.
The owners have executed their portion of the agreement and the grading plan
has been approved by this department.
FISCAL IMPACT:
JA:PH-009
WPC 5714E
None.
12-1
'--
UNCONTROLLED EMBANKMENT
FOR
366 AND 368 SURREY DRIVE
I
... 4P~()X. /,/po {,.Yo
()~ F Ii. '-
FILE # P/l-()()9
N.7:S
7-29-91
EXH lBl T
A
/2 -. '2-
THE CITY OF CHUU VISTA PAR1Y DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Statement of disclosure of certain ownership interests, payments, or campaign contnbutions, on all matters -
which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council, Planning Commission, and all other
official bodies. The following information must be disclosed: ,.
or arr Icatlon
contract,ALe., contractor,
1.
List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the
sub.c<]p!ractor, material supplier.
~/1rf(A-? ffI /J1 ff-
2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all
individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership
interest iq the partnership.
N/A-
,
3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names
of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or
trustor o{ tbe trust.
(\//4:-
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff,
Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months? Yes
No ~ If yes, please indicate person(s):
5. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants or independent
contracto;.s who you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter.
N,II:} .
6. Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the aggregate, contributed more than $1,000 to a
Councilmember in the current or preceding election period? Yes _ No -K If yes, state which
Councilmember( s):
Person is defined as: ~ny individual, fiml, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organization, corporation,
est(/[e, trust, receiver, syndicate, this and any other county, city and country, city, municipality, district or other political subdivision,
or an)' other group or combination acting as a unit."
(NOTE:
Date:
[A-Il:>',A:DISCLOSETXTj
Signat tra r/applicant
k J:"TiiKIf->I///7? ff
Print or type name of contractor/applicant
[Revised: 11130190)
f . I f
! (f k
~.~ ~..._,,_,.__~,_,,"_~_>_o_,_,~~~_~~~,__~_~~_"'''~~"'_~
:r:r e,.'\ ItS. A
IC - 33~
3w., - ~8 ~/2IUY 1>7;:,
':"'NCC'O./Tl<<lo-Ut:> E'" 841
THE CITY OF CHULA. JlISTA PARTY DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Statement of disclosure of certain ownership interests, payments, or campaign contnbutions, on all matters -
which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council, Planning Commission, and all other
official bodies. The following information must be disclosed:
1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the contract, i.e., contractor,
subcontractor, ptaterial supplier.
\ AI A ]) I E' tJ I 75 EJ> D E" 1--1
M ft1( y- L Y N N 1> c -p "D "F H-
2. IT any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all
individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership
interest in the partnership.
~/A
3. IT any person identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names
of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or
trustor of th7 trust.
^/;A
/
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff,
Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months? Yes
No!i.!..... IT yes, please indicate person(s):
5. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants or independent
contractors who you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter.
A.jA -
6. Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the aggregate, contributed more than $1,000 to a
Councilmember in the current or preceding election period? Yes _ No V"ITyes, state which
Councilmember( s):
Person is defined as: -Any individual, fimJ, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organization, corporation,
estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, this and any other county, city and countty, city, municipality, district or other political subdivision,
or any other group or combination acting as a.unit,- ./ ~ ~ .A9~_ _-
(NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary) /f/"'/ ,. v - -
Date: ~-/:Z-'l/ ~-~ /lY~
Signatu of con actor/applicant
M I't-RY- )...Y /\J IJ . 1) t 1) 1) ~ M
Print or type name of contractor/applicant
[A-I) :\\A:DISCLOSE.TXT] [Revised: 1113OI9OJ
l~d-A
DRAFT
RESOLUTION NO. 1~'2.4~
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN UNCONTROLLED
EMBANKMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA AND KATSUMI J. TAKASHIMA AND AUTHORIZING
THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE SAME
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City
the City of Chula Vista that that certain uncontrolled
agreement between the City of Chula Vista, a
corporation, and Katsumi J. Takashima for the property
366 Surrey Drive dated the day of
copy of which is on file in the Office
Document # , the same as though fully
and th~ same is hereby approved.
Council of
embankment
municipal
located at
, 19 , a
of the Ci ty Clerk as
set for th here in be,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the Ci ty of
Chula Vista be, and he is hereby authorized and directed to
execute said agreement for and on behalf of said City.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Ci ty Clerk of the Ci ty
of Chula Vista be, and she is hereby authorized and directed to
record said agreement in the office of the San Diego County
Recorder.
John P. Lippitt
Director of Public Works
9170a
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
Presented by
/2. A.-I /1 ,-A- t
Recording reques~ed by and
please re~urn ~o:
Public Works Department
Engineering Division Permits
City of Chula Vista
P.O. Box 1087
Chula vista, CA 91912
DRAFT
(This space for Recorder's use, only)
Affects A.P.N.: 593-302-06 & 593-302-32
:::~ ~:~
8::
~~::::l::~~
AGREEMENT POR LAND DEVELOPMENT
POR UNCONTROLLED EMBANKMENT
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this day of
, 19_, by and between the City of Chula
Vista, hereinafter referred to as "City", and Katsumi J. Takashima,
hereinafter referred to as "Developer."
WIT N E SSE T H
WHEREAS Developer is the owner of certain real property
located within the City of Chula Vista, County of San Diego, State
of California, and more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the southeast corner of Lot 161 of Rancho
Robinhood III subdivision according to Map thereof No. 8604,
filed in the office of the Recorder of said San Diego County
June 24, 1977; thence south-westerly along the southerly line
of said Lot 161, S 710 47' 13" W, 150.00 feet; thence S 180
12' 47" E, 60.00 feet; thence N 710 47' 13" E, 250.00 feet;
thence N 180 12' 47" W, 60.00 feet to the point of beginning
and
WHEREAS Developer has allowed to be placed upon said property
certain fill material, i.e. dirt, rocks, etc., which fill material
has been so placed in the manner known as loose fill and
uncompacted, and
WHEREAS pursuant to Section 15.04.335 such fill is designated
as an uncontroll~d embankment requiring the execution of special
maintenance agreement for land development,
NOW THEREFORE IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED by and between the City of
Chula Vista and Katsumi J. Takashima, as follows:
1. The fill deposited upon that certain property described
hereinabove, owned by Developer, shall hereby be designated as an
uncontrolled embankment and shall be constructed in accordance with
Grading Permit No. PG-335 and plans approved by the City Engineer.
2. Developer hereby acknowledges that as an uncontrolled
embankment said site is not eligible for a building permit unless
special soils analysis and foundation design are submitted and
Developer hereby agrees to provide said soils analysis and
foundation design or to reconstruct the embankment and fill in the
manner as approved by the City Engineer.
)~~".:3
DRAFT
3. The land development work shall be done and maintained in
a safe and sanitary manner at the sole cost, risk, and
responsibility of the owner and his successors in interest, who
shall hold the City harmless with respect thereto.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereunto have set their hands
and seals the day and year first above written.
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA:
ATTEST:
MAYOR
CITY CLERK
~~~
~J. T SH
(Attach Notary Acknowledgment)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SA. tV
JJt=~ 0
.
}ss
. in the year 19~,
and for said State, personally appeared
M
OFFICIAL SEAL
JAMES W. JESSUP
NOTARY PUBUC CAufO~NI'"
PRINCIPAl OFfiCE 'N
SAN DIEGO COUNT'J
My Commission Expires January 18. 1993
. personally known to me
(or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person_ whose name
1 c,. subscribed to the within instrument. and acknowledged to me that he-
executed it. - -
WITNESS my hand an
Notary Public in
ACKNOWLEDGMENT -General-Wolcotls Fonn 233CA-Rev. 5-82
el982 WOLCOTTS. INC. (PfiCe Class 8-21
\J.
RESOLUTION NO. }t-~t>O
DRAFT
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN UNCONTROLLED
EMBANKMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA AND WADlE AND MARY-LYNN DEDDEH AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE SAME
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula Vista that that certain uncontrolled embankment
agreement between the Ci ty of Chula Vista, a municipal
corpora tion, and Wadie P. and Mary Lynn Deddeh for the property
located at 368 Surrey Drive dated the day of ,
19 ,a copy of which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk
as-nocument # , the same as though fully set forth herein be,
and the same is hereby approved.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of
Chula Vista be, and he is hereby authorized and directed to
execute said agreement for and on behalf of said City.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk of the City
of Chula Vista be, and she is hereby authorized and directed to
record said agreement in the office of the San Diego County
Recorder.
Presented by
John P. Lippitt
Director of Public Works
9166a
I~B.I /IMJ''-
Recording reques~ed by and
please re~urn ~o:
Public Works Department
Engineering Division Permits
City of Chula Vista
P.O. Box 1087
Chula Vista, CA 91912
DRAFT
(This space for Recorder's use, only)
Affects A.P.N.: 593-302-07 & 593-302-35
~ .
AGREEMENT FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT
FOR UNCONTROLLED BMBANKKENT
mm
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this day of
, 19___, by and between the City of Chula Vista,
hereinafter referred to as "City", and Wadie P~ Deddeh and Mary-
Lynn D. Deddeh, hereinafter referred to as "Developer."
WIT N E SSE T H :
WHEREAS Developer is the owner of certain real property
located within the City of Chula Vista, County of San Diego, State
of California, and more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the southwest corner of Lot 162 of Rancho
Robinhood III subdivision according to Map thereof No. 8604,
filed in the office of the Recorder of said San Diego County
June 24, 1977; thence north-easterly along the southerly line
of said Lot 162, N 710 47' 13" E, 210.00 feet; thence
S 180 12' 47" E, 60.00 feet; thence S 710 47' 13" W, 210.00
feet; thence N 180 12' 47" W, 60.00 feet to the point of
beginning
and
WHEREAS Developer
certain fill material,
has been so placed
uncompacted, and
has allowed to be placed upon said property
i.e. dirt, rocks, etc., which fill material
in the manner known as loose fill and
WHEREAS pursuant to section 15.04.335 such fill is designated
as an uncontrolled embankment requiring the execution of special
maintenance agreement for land development,
NOW THEREFORE IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED by and between the City of
Chula vista and Wadie P. and Mary-Lynn D. Deddeh, as follows:
1. The fill deposited upon that certain property described
hereinabove, owned by Developer, shall hereby be designated as an
uncontrolled embankment and shall be constructed in accordance with
Grading Permit No. PG-335 and plans approved by the City Engineer.
2. Developer hereby acknowledges that as an uncontrolled
embankment said site is not eligible for a building permit unless
special soils analysis and foundation design are submitted and
Developer hereby agrees to provide said soils analysis and
foundation design or to reconstruct the embankment and fill in the
manner as approved by the City Engineer.
1l.6 -3
DRAFT
3. The land development work shall be done and maintained in
a safe and sanitary manner at the sole cost, risk, and
responsibility of the owner and his successors in interest, who
shall hold the City harmless with respect thereto.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereunto have set their hands
and seals the day and year first above written.
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA:
ATTEST:
MAYOR
CITY CLERK
DEVELOPER:
~Y?~
-
WADlE P. DEDDEH
?J1~-:~ U-~
Y- NN D. DEDDEH
(Attach Notary Acknowledgment)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
i COUNTY OF .s;. '" f) J i!j 0
~
}s
, in the year 19!J.j,
te, personally < appeared
.~~i.:'-
&.l,~~b..f!1"......:.1'.
\ Q(~....;<--"~ -,'
\~<~;:qi~
~5~1
OFFIC/to! SEAL
JAMES W. JESSUP
NCTAR'Y PUBLIC CAlIfOr-NIA
PRINCIPAL OffiCE IN
SAN O:EGO COUNTY
My Commjs~jon Expires Jen.uary 1 a, 1993
\ ."",,,,...,,,---- "'" ""'-... SU
@1982 WOlCOTTS. INC. (prICe ellSs 8-21
I~~"~
_,,~.__~~____.._ "-"<'-'---"'--t",,"~:::.~~~,.,,"r~.~.C"'~""_iC"""_f.'''''"1
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item I~ A...8
Meeting Date 8/13/91
Publ ic Hearing: Regarding rate increase request for refuse
collection services
Resolution'f.?;O I Approving rates for collection and
disposal of refuse effective July 1, 1991, and establishing a
Waste Management Trust Fund
Ord i nance ~ 41S Amend i ng Ord i nance No. 1993 c 1 ari fyi ng
methodo logy for ca 1 cul at i ng future rate increases to collect
and dispose of refuse
Director of Fi~~ ~)?
City Attorney IJifJ ~ t-?t
City Manager.jG ~~ (4/Sths Vote: Yes___No-X-1
Since 1986, Laidlaw Waste Systems, Inc., in accordance with the Franchise
Ordinance, has been entitled to request an annual rate increase for operating
expenses to be effective with the April billing each year by giving the City a
"Notice of Intention" no later than 45 days prior to the effective date. The
"Notice of Intention" to apply for a rate increase that was received from
Laidlaw in February 1991 triggered the City Council's interest for a more
in-depth look at Chula Vista rates in comparison to the rest of the County.
At that time, Council directed staff to set the matter for public hearing once
the requested information was available. Due to the time necessary for the
staff analysis and an independent review of past and current rates, Laidlaw
voluntarily agreed to defer the effective date of the increase until July
1991. Subsequently, the County announced 1 andfi 11 di sposa 1 fee increases of
27.8% effective July 1, 1991 and Laidlaw amended the "Notice of Intention" to
include a request for the pass through of those disposal costs. (See
Exhibit A.)
This report addresses the current rate increase request from Laidlaw composed
of a pass through for disposal costs, a pass through for the franchise fee
increase, and an increase based on the Consumer Price Index. It discusses a
recommendation for a current rate schedule to be effective July 1,1991, and
reviews the extensive analysis that has been performed and the rationale for
the recommendation. It also addresses the methodology for ca 1 cul at i ng rate
increases, suggests a redistribution in the amount of $305.000, and recommends
establishment of a Waste Management Trust Fund.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Adopt the resolution approving the rate schedule to be effective July 1,
1991 shown in Exhibit B, and approving the establishment of a Waste
Management Trust Fund.
2. Place ordinance which will clarify future rate calculations on first
reading.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
l ~ ' 1
Page 2, Item I ~ A....J3
Meeting Date 8/13/91
DISCUSS ION:
The current procedure for rate review was established originally in 1986 and
simplified what had previously been a more cumbersome process for annual
revi ew and pub 1 i c heari ng. The current procedure all ows for, among other
things, a direct pass through of landfill cost increases imposed by the County
of San Diego, as well as pass through of the City franchise fee increases of
one-half percent (.5%) annually until 1996. The franchisee is also entitled
to a rate increase up to the change in Consumer Price Index (but not to exceed
6%) to cover operational cost increases. The ordinance allows for the rate
requests to be administratively reviewed by the City Manager's Office with
not ifi cat i on to the City Counc il . The City Counc il may, at its d i scret ion,
require a public hearing for any proposed rate increase.
The current ordinance language states that "the amount of the [rate] increase
shall be limited by the percentage increase since grantee's last rate increase
in the San Diego area CPl." Over the past year, staff has determined that
Laidlaw was using a different methodology to implement rate increases than was
intended by the City when the ordinance was adopted. Since 1986, the annual
CPI increases effective in April each year has been applied against the
exi st i ng rate whi ch i ncl udes components for operat i ng costs, 1 andfi 11 fees,
and franchise fees.
The proper calculation for annual CPI rate increases should only be applied on
the component of the rate covering operating costs, and should not include
landfill costs and franchise fees which are handled separately as complete
pass through costs. The company has cooperated with the City in recalculating
and comparing rate increases received since 1986.
Laidlaw and City staff agree on an amount of $305.000 to be redistributed.
This amount includes interest and is the result of several months of extensive
discussions and negotiations with Laidlaw. The City's auditor, Deloitte and
Touche, has provided primary assistance by independently reviewing the
financial information from Laidlaw and assisting in the complex calculation to
arrive at the $305,000.
Thi s amount represents the di fference between the amount of revenue (pl us
interest) received by Laidlaw since 1986 versus the amount of revenue they
would have received if the annual CPI rate increases had been calculated as
intended by the Franchise Ordinance. Staff does not bel ieve there was an
intentional miscalculation by Laidlaw. In fact, the annual increases have
been approved at staff level and it was not until the most recent request for
a rate increase that the City Attorney pi cked up on the fact that the annual
rate increases were not calculated entirely in accordance with the intention
of the Franchise Ordinance.
Recommended Redistribution
There are two alternatives suggested by staff and agreed to by the contractor
for a possible redistribution of the $305,000. Both alternatives are based on
\~,2.
Page 3, Item l~,q....~
Meeting Date 8/13/91
the assumption that the ratepayers should benefit from the redistribution
amount. Both alternatives propose to distribute the amount as a means of
mitigating rate increases for three years. Sixty percent would be used in the
first year to reduce rate increases and 20 percent would be applied in each of
the second and third year. This would lessen the impact of the rate increase
in the fourth year once the ent ire red i stri but i on has been completed. Both
alternatives split the rate reductions between residential and commercial
ratepayers in the approximate proportion of the original overpayments. Since
the proposed alternatives extend the redistribution amount over future years,
interest to cover the future value of the money will be included in the
calculation.
Alternative II
$305.000 (olus value of future interest) to be used to offset future rate
increases over the next three years.
Alternative 12
$50.000 to be paid immediately into a Waste ManaQement Trust Fund and
the remaininQ $255.000 (olus value of future interest) to be used to
offset future rate increases over the next three years.
The staff recommendation is to approve the redistribution method proposed in
Alternative #2. The additional aspect of this alternative is the
establishment of a $50,000 Waste ManaQement Trust Fund. It is staff's
recommendat i on that these funds be avail able to be appropriated at Counc il ' s
d i scret i on for future recyc 1 i ng and soli d waste program needs wh i ch mi ght
otherwise be covered only by a General Fund appropriation or a direct rate
increase.
As Council is aware, the requirement for cities to establish active recycling
programs will place most of the cost burden for operations directly upon the
public. This relatively small trust fund could provide funds for waste
reduction activities such as: increasingly important publ ic education
campaigns; matching funds for recycling grants; work on positive economic
incentives, such as variable rate structures; etc.
Reauest for Rate Increase
As indicated in Laidlaw's letter dated July 30, 1991 (Exhibit A), they are
requesting a rate increase for the following components:
1. A pass through of a 27.8 percent landfill cost increase imposed by San
Diego County as of July It 1991.
2. A pass through of the increase in the Franchi se Fee from seven percent
(7%) to seven and one-half percent (7.5%) that is paid to the City of
Chula Vista.
3. An increase of six percent based on the most recent change in the
Consumer Price Index.
\~.3
Page 4, Item (3 A ~,g
Meeting Date 8/13/91
As indicated in Exhibit C, the current family residential rate is $10.56
(including recycling). If the above requested rate increase is granted, it
will result in a rate of $11.51 or a 9.0 percent increase. If the Council
approves the redi stri but i on method, Alternative #2 as descri bed above, the
rate will instead increase to $11.29 for family residential or 6.9 percent.
Commercial rates will increase 7.2 percent if the redistribution method
Alternative #2 is approved.
Countywide Rate Survey
The staff analysis also included a refuse rate survey with the most up-to-date
rates for 16 other cities within the County (see Exhibit C). The data
collected compares the residential rate (including recycling) and commercial
rates for one 3 cubic yard bin picked up once a week. To summarize, the
current Chula Vista rates for single family residential and commercial
accounts are, respectively, 1.5 percent and 5.8 percent below the average
rates throughout the County. Thi s is primarily because most contracts have
recently been adjusted for operational, recycling programs, and landfill
increases while the City's increase request from Laidlaw has been held pending
this public hearing.
The rate increase requested by Laidlaw (for operations, franchise fee and
1 andfill fees) would pl ace Chul a Vi sta' s rates above the County averages by
6.8 percent for res i dent i a 1 and 2.8 percent for commerci a 1 . Approval of the
recommended increase adjusted by the proposed redistribution would place the
City's res i dent i a 1 and commerc i a 1 rates at 4.8 percent and .9 percent above
the County's average rates.
Conclusion
It is bei ng recommended that the recent rate increase request be approved
effective July 1, 1991 as modified by the offset as described in Alternative
#2 above. Future rate increase requests would also be modified by the
appropriate offset until the redistribution is completed. Approval of the
proposed rate schedule would place Laidlaw close to the average of other
jurisdictions. Finally, approval of the staff recommendation will also
provide limited funds for recycling and solid waste program needs aimed at the
long-range plan of reducing waste and stabilizing disposal rates.
FISCAL IMPACT: If Council approves the proposal as outl ined, the City will
receive $50,000 to provide funding for future recycling and solid waste
program needs. The increase in the City's franch i se fee from seven percent
(7%) to seven and one-half percent (7.5%) generates approximately $30,000
additional revenue to the General Fund.
I f the redi stri but i on method is approved, funds will be used to 1 essen the
impact to citizens of future rate increases for three years.
WPC 0631G
\ ~..~
._"..~__.M_______'___"~___.__~__~~_'_'._"__~__'_
EXHIBIT 'AI
REQUEST FOR
RATE INCREASE
8888881
LAIDLAW WASTE SYSTEMS INC.
July 30, 1991
Mr. John Goss, City Manager
City of Chula VISta
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vzsta, CA 91910
Dear Mr. Goss:
Further to our letter of April 2, 1991 regarding Notice of Intention to apply for a rate increase
we are enclosing proposed new rate schedules effective July 1, 1991.
I
The new schedules have been arrived at following discussions with representatives of your
Department as well as Mr. Bnlce Boogaard, the City Attorney and Mr. Lyman Christopher, the
Finance Director. The new rates have been calculated include the following adjustments:
1. A pass-thm of a 27.8% landfill cost increase imposed by San Diego County
effective July 1, 1991.
2. A pass-thm of an increase in Franchise Fee Cost from 7% to 7.5%, paid to the
City of Chula Vzsta.
3. An increase to cover the increase in other costs based on the change in the
Consumer Price Index applied to the non-Iandfil~ non-franchise fee component
of the rate since April 1985. The most recent CPI change was 6%.
Vze proposed rate schedules do not include any adjustments which may be agreed upon
pertaining to previously approved rates for the period since April 1985.
If you require any further information in order to approve new rates effective July 1, 1991, please
let me know.
Sincerely,
fbulfRl
Division Manager
cc: ' Mr. Lyman Christopher
Mr. Bmce Boogaard
Mrs. Stephanie Popek
P.O. BOX 967, CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 92012 (619) 421-9400
\~...c;
"
"
LAIDLAW WASTE SYSTEMS
HAND PICK UP RATE SCHEDULE
7/01/91
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
TYPE OF SERVICE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES
THE SECOND AND FOR EACH
ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL UNIT
IN MULTIPLE DWELLING
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL
UP TO (2) 40 GAL. CONTAINERS
ONE TIME WEEKLY
UP TO (2) 40 GAL. CONTAINERS
TWO TIMES WEEKLY
UP TO (2) 40 GAL. CONTAINERS
THREE TIMES WEEKLY
EXHIBIT IB'
RESIDENTIAL RATES
2/01/91
RATE
10/01/90 (ADDS 7/01/91 (1)
RATE RECYCLE) RATE
$9.46 $10.56 $11.29
$6.81 $ 7.91 $ 8.60
$10.50
$18.87
$27.82
$10.50
$18.87
$27.82
TRAILER PARKS & MOTELS (CENTRAL LOCATION) PER UNIT
MINIMUM PER MONTH
TWO TIMES WEEKLY
THREE TIMES WEEKLY
FOUR TIMES WEEKLY
DAILY PICK UP (6 TIMES WEEKLY)
$17.73
$ 6.24
$ 7.90
$ 9.46
$10.86
$17.73
$ 6.24
$ 7.90
$ 9.46
$10.86
TRAILER PARKS (INDIVIDUAL CAN SERVICE) PER UNIT
ONE COLLECTION WEEKLY
TWO COLLECTIONS WEEKLY
$ 6.81
$ 9.10
$ 6.81
$ 9.10
$11. 22
$20.17
$29.74
$18.59
$ 6.92
$ 8.60
$10.19
$11.61
$ 7.50
$ 9.82
(1)
RATES THAT WOULD BE EFFECTIVE 7/01/91 IF COUNCIL APPROVES
ALTERNATIVE 2 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
\~..(.p
LAIDLAW WASTS SYSTEMS
CITY OF CHULA VISTA EXHIBIT IB1
COMMERCIAL BIN RATES
JULY 1, 1991 COMMERCIAL
BIN RATES
:-----MINIMUM-----: :-----MAXIMUM-----:
NO. NO. WEEKLY RATE AT RATE AT RATE AT RATE AT
BINS PICK UPS 6-30-91 7-1-91 6-30-91 7-1-91
------------------- -------------------- --------------------
1 1 $54.95 $59.22 $64.80 $69.40
1 2 $91.50 $99.43 $108.90 $117.41
1 3 $126.60 $138.15 $152.65 $165.06
1 4 $166.40 $181.72 $198.45 $214.83
1 5 $204.20 $223.22 $244.40 $264.75
1 6 $244.10 $266.89 $295.80 $320.30
1 7 $289.70 $316.46 $343.80 $372.35
2 1 $97.75 $105.89 $118.90 $127.74
2 2 $177.85 $193.55 $201. 70 $218.19
2 3 $235.55 $258.06 $273.65 $297.42
2 4 $304.95 $334.66 $352.30 $383.58
2 5 $381. 30 $418.45 $426.90 $465.55
2 6 $465.20 $510.03 $520.85 $567.52
2 7 $549.10 $601.61 $608.70 $663.18
3 1 $140.90 $152.92 $173.50 $186.60
3 2 $243.25 $266.02 $285.40 $309.56
3 3 $332.45 $365.53 $426.35 $462.53
3 4 $442.40 $486.47 $497.10 $542.98
3 5 $552.10 $607.16 $609.90 $666.88
3 6 $686.35 $753.21 $711.15 $778.83
3 7 $832.75 $911.82 $863.35 $943.43
4 1 $184.60 $200.52 $226.10 $243.39
4 2 $306.50 $336.27 $360.00 $391. 54
4 3 $436.25 $480.12 $502.30 $548.36
4 4 $596.35 $655.33 $633.85 $694.07
4 5 $760.85 $835.09 $776.30 $851. 05
4 6 $925.75 $1,015.25 $981. 25 $1,072.59
4 7 $1,090.45 $1,195.21 $1 , 145. 85 $1,252.45
5 1 $225.80 $245.54 $276.25 $297.65
5 2 $392.00 $429.50 $441.60 $480.74
5 3 $562.75 $618.17 $571.55 $627.26
5 4 $741.35 $814.94 $772.35 $846.97
5 5 $913.60 $1,005.15 $1,021.10 $1,116.21
5 6 $1,090.45 $1,200.12 $1,236.05 $1,350.54
5 7 $1 ,311 .75 $1,441. 01 $1,343.06 $1,473.35
6 1 $266.95 $290.50 $326.95 $352.49
6 2 $468.25 $513.18 $514.50 $560.96
6 3 $664.95 $731.11 $711.00 $778.68
6 4 $857.15 $944.38 $929.20 $1,018.82
6 5 $1,052.45 $1,160.86 $1,184.45 $1,297.23
6 6 $1,261.40 $1,391.45 \ ~-1 $1,468.35 $1,605.24
6 7 $1,488.55 $1,640.83 $1,703.35 $1,862.74
--. ,_.. -, -,,,_...<<.,'",,,...- ~..",_._--,-----~,-"'~..."".,.._.,._~..........._.~
III
w
-
I-
-
~
Cl
W
l-
e
Ill:
o
~
Ill:
o
U
Z,...
-....
...00
0":'
Ill.....
~O
e tIl
Ill: III
li-g
-OJ
.... III
~X
~::;)
~'-'
oil
w
III
::;)
...
W
Ill:
>-
....
=
I-
Z
o
II:
tIl
~
...
III
S
III
'"
III
III
"-
III
tIl
s:
U
c:
III
...
"-
III
u
...
III
S
S
o
u
~L
III
OJ
c:
III
"0
tIl
III
'"
tIl
...
o
OJ
U
III
...
OJ
c:
o
U
III
tIl
:J
.....
III
'"
c:
III
:E
a
,...
Ill.
III
.....
III
u
>
...
III
tIl
'-'
~
N
o
N
co
'"
....
o
..0
00
....
OJ
tIl
III
o
U
"0
III
.0
tIl
...
III
U
,...
)(
III
OJ
0-
o
...
0-
'-'
"0
C:.
:J
"-
III
...
III
c:
III
c:I
o
o
o
o
u
"0
w
o
"0
III
c:
o
...
o
u
~
'"
-.:t
N
r-.
....
.....
.....
....
....
....
OJ
tIl
III
o
U
...
III
:E
III
Cl
~
.....
o
o
N
'"
....
co
N
o
....
III
tIl
...
III
>
c:
::;)
c:
o
III
U
w
o
OJ
.
.
.
0"-'
D')LL:
0"0'
OJ c: .
Ill.
&::L..:
Olll'
0"0'
0._ I
>.
no 0 .
"- ... .
'" 0- .
.
.
"0 III
1Il-
tIlCl
o c:
U tIl
~
o
..0
....
. co
'"
....
......
'"
co
'"
'"
....
co
'"
o
....
......
.....
.....
o
....
....
c:
...
:J
.0
s:
tIl
III
:E
......
OJ
tIl
III
o
U
tIl
III
OJ
c:
u
c:
w
~
o
....
-.:t
'"
r-.
'"
....
..0
-.:t
.0
....
....
III
tIl
o
0-
tIl
Cl
o
"0
"0
c:
o
u
tIl
W
o
"0
"0
c:
o
U
tIl
W
o
S
......
..0
'"
.....
N
o'
.....
'"
.....
r-.
-.:t
....
00
-.:t
....
....
....
:I:
III
"0
III
...J
s:
U
III
III
co
III
...
III
0-
S
~
-.:t
o
-.:t
co
'"
....
'"
00
o
....
....
o
u
"0
w
III
tIl
III
:E
III
...J
~
..0
r-.
..0
-.:t
..0
....
..0
....
....
....
....
o
u
"0
w
III
>
o
...
c:I
c:
o
S
III
...J
OJ "0
III c:
III III
...
OJ
tIlCl
c:
.'-
~~
c:~
III
lIl"'fl
OJ tIl
III .0
... Cl u
c:
"0 0- c:
1Il'-
tIl III S
. 1Il:l:"O
'" tIl III
~
N
~
o
'"
..0
N
..0
....
N
o
r-.
'"
....
o
....
00
....
o
....
....
.....
....
....
o
u
"0
w
III
. tIl
o
0-
tIl
Cl
III
"0
tIl
c:
III
III
u
o
>-
OJ
u
III
c:
o
III
"0
tIl
c:
III
III
U
o
OJ
III
:z:
. N-.:t
........
\~-cg'
tIl
...
o
OJ
U
III
...
OJ
c:
o
u
-.:t
tIl
OJ
U
U
III
.....
+ 0
0'11:
o
0)(
o
....
-.:t
..0
...
.
o
o
-.:t
-.:t
...
o
'"
'"
...
.
o
'"
o
...
c:
...
:J
.0
s:
tIl
III
:E
......
:I:
III
"0
III
...J
>-
III
:I:
o
no
c: Cl
-c:
:I:
III
> III
III tIl
....-
s:
~ u
o ~
OJ........
:il0.....
... III
OJ >
c: tIl.-
o tIl tIl
U III :J
u-
OU
... )(
..0 0- III
~
'"
o
o
00
'"
'"
...
....
'"
...
.
o
.....
....
..0
00
00
....
o
co
.....
....
...
.
'"
00
00
...
c:
...
:J
.0
s:
tIl
III
:E
:I:
III
-
"0
III
...J
......
-
III
tIl
...
III
>
c:
::;)
tIl
o
U
...
III
:E
c:
III
VI
III
III
OJ
c:
III
VI
o
OJ
"0
III
0-
0-
III
OJCl
o c:
c:::
U
>-
U
"-Ill
"- ...
tIl
OJ
U
U
III
.....
+ 0
0'11:
o
o )(
~
'"
....N
.......
..0
'"
00
o
..0
...
co
'"
...
.....
.....
o
...
-.:t
....
o
....
....
c:
...
:J
.0
s:
tIl
III
:E
......
OJ
tIl
III
o
U
c:
...
:J
.0
s:
tIl
III
:E
s:
U
III
III
co
III
c:
III
o
VI
III
..
tIl
>
EXHIBIT 'e'
RATE SURVEY
~
"
N
......
....
.
r-.
lI\
00
.
...
lI\
III
,...
GI
III
OCll
OoGl
. ...
OoU
lI\C
III ...
-0
lI\
.
o
...
III
,..
GI
III
...CIl
lI\lI
....
::~
III ...
~
'-'
:I
CIl
-
"0
...
CIl
....
,..
...
00
CIl......
"'0
tIl.....
... ......
>..0
CIl II
.... OJ
:::l CIl
S:1ll:
u,-,
~
'-'
:I
CIl
....
"0
.-
CIl
....
,..
...
00
......
...
~
GI
OJ
III
III Ill:
...
.:n~
> III
1118.
....0
:::l ...
S:~
~'-'
"
N
......
...
I
r-.
N
N
.
00
lI\
III
,..
GI
III
CIl
GI
...
U
C
N
N
,.;
'-'
00
N
.
...
...
III
,..
II
III
CIl
II
...
~
...
~
.
-0
'-'
:I
III
....
'tI
...
CIl
....
,..
...C
000
..... ...
... ...
~~
...
GI "-
OJ OJ
1\1 tIl
aa ~.'-
OJ "2
.~ "2 Ill:
> tIl
CIl 8. t
....OOJ
:::l.......
s:~1II
U'-'
4(
00
....
r-.
.....
u
0..
:J:
DRAFT
ORDINANCE NO. i Lf 75
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 1993
CLARIFYING METHODOLOGY FOR CALCULATING FUTURE
RATE INCREASES TO COLLECT AND DISPOSE OF
REFUSE.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
section 1. section 9 of Ordinance No. 1993, adopted on or
about July 28, 1982, as substantially amended by Ordinance No.
2104, adopted March 5, 1985, is hereby amended to read as follows:
section 9. Rates for Collection.
9.1 Basis for Future Modifications.
City and grantee mutually agree that The initial rate
charqed to. and to be paid by~ the reoidento, induotrial and
commercial enterprioeo waste removal rateoayers ("Rateoavers")
in the City of Chula Vista, shall be those as may from time to
time be established bv Council resolution determined in
accordance with the orovisions of this section. The rates to
be charqed at the time of the codification of this ordinance
amendinq this section shall be those preoently established by
Resolution No. 11911 " adopted on January 22, 1985
2
9.2 Rate Modification Procedure.
Beginning on April 1, 1986,3 Crantee Either partv4 may,
upon filing a notice of intention to modifY rates ("Notice of
Intention") which is accurate and complete information
satisfactorily supporting any increase requested, forty-five
(45) days in advance ("Notice period") with the City Uanager
other Party, increaoe modifY rates subject to the following
conditions and limitations:
ill Contents of Notice of Intention.
The Notice of Intention shall demonstrate for each tvoe
of service (residential. commercial). the existinq rate:
that oortion of said rate charaed for the ouroose of
reimbursinq the Grantee for Grantee's landfill costs
("Landfill Rate Comoonent"). that oortion of said rate
charaed for the ouroose of payina the required franchise
fees imoosed under the authority of this Ordinance
trash34.wp
August 9, 1991
section 9, Marked for Changes
Page 1
\~(:\-l
DRAFT
("Franchise Fee Rate Component"). and that portion of
said rate charged for all other purposes ("Other Rate
Component") ; the amount of modif ication in each Component
of the rate that is being souqht; the amount of the
modification in the entire rate beinq souqht; the amount
of the new Rate Component; the amount of the new rate
after the proposed modification; and the iustification
for said proposed modification.
~ "other Rate Component" Chanqes.
The amount of the increaoe ohall be limited by the
percentage increaoe The proportion of modification to the
"other Rate Component" shall be limited by the proportion
of change since grantee's last rate increase in the San
Diego area Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers
as compiled by the united States Department of Labor,
Bureau of Labor statistics for the latest twelve-month
period for which statistics are available. In no event
shall the amount of the increase exceed six percent (6%)
of the service Rates.
(-2- A)
In the event that the Consumer Price Index
referred to in Paragraph (~) above shall no
longer be published, then another similar
generally recognized index may be substituted
upon approval ~ Qy the City Manaqer.5
(.15-) "Landfill Rate Component" Changes.
The proportion. of modification to the Landfill Rate
Component shall not exceed the proportion of chanqe since
qrantee's last rate increase in the rate charqed by the
County of San Dieqo to Grantee for "tippinq fees" at the
Otay Landfill. or if the Otay Landfill has been closed.
at the next closest operatinq landfill. for the latest
twelve-month period.
Where landfill chargeD are increaoed grantee ohall notify
ci ty of i t13 intention to IIpaoo through" oaid coatI] thirty
(30) daya prior to increaainq ito rateo. The City
Council ohall ha7e the option to require a public hearing
on thio increaoe at ito diocretion. If the City deeo not
notify grantee of it13 intention to require a public
hearing within the thirty (30) day notice period, grantee
io authori~ed to increaoe rateo.
trash34.wp
August 9, 1991
section 9, Marked for Changes
Page 2
\~f.\.2.
DRAFT
(4) Franchise Fee Rate Component Chanqes.
The proportion of modification to the Franchise Fee Rate
Component shall not exceed the proportion of chanqe in
the Franchise Fee that is or may be required by law to be
paid to the city of Chula vista.
L2l Increase Approval Hierarchy.
Annual modifications which constitute rate increases
shall be subject to the review and written6 approval of
the city Manager. unless the city Council shall. within
20 . days ("Public Hearinq option Period") after the
commencement of the Notice Period set the rate modi-
fication request for public hearinq. in which case said
rate increases shall be subject to. and not instituted
until. the review and written aP'Proval of the city
council after said public hearing.
(6) No Public Hearing A'Pproval Procedure.
If the city council has not set a 'Public hearinq during
the Public Hearing Option Period, the City Manager shall
notify grantee in writing of his approval or denial of
the increase wi thin five ( 5) days of the end of the
Public Hearinq option Period. within twenty (20) oalendar
dayo of reoeipt of aoourate and oomplete information
oatiofaotorily oupporting any inoreaoe requeoted in
aooordanoe with raragraph (1) above.
ill Notice to Grantee of Public Hearinq Approval Procedure.
The City council shall have the unilateral right to
require a hearing for any rate increase at its
discretion. If the City intends to require a public
hearing, it shall notify grantee within ouid t'ienty (20)
five (5) days after the end of the Public Hearing option
~eriod.
~ Automatic Approval.
In the absence of any written communication from the city
Manager or Council within said twenty (20) dayo five (5)
days after the end of the Public Hearinq option Period to
the contrary, a modification representinq a rate increase
is deemed approved.
~ Frequency of Rate Increase Requests.
No more than one such increase may be implemented in any
trash34.wp
August 9, 1991
Section 9, Marked for Changes
Page 3
\~ f\ ...a
DRAFT
one calendar year although grantee shall have at any time
the right to submit a request to the City Council for
additional rate relief at any time extraordinary expenses
are incurred.
9.3. Senior Rate Schedules.
The City Council of the City of Chula vista may at any
time, by amending Chapter 8.24 of the Chula vista Municipal
Code, establish a program for preferential rates for senior
citizens or other classifications which are deemed to be in
the public interest...
section 2.
effect thirty
hereof.
This ordinance shall take and be in full force and
(30) days after the final passage and adoption
section 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and
adoption of this Ordinance; shall enter the same in the book of
original Ordinances of said city; and shall make a minute of the
passage and adoption hereof in the minutes of the meeting at which
the same is passed and adopted.
Lyman Christopher
Finance Director
o:f)
Presented by:
trash34.wp
August 9, 1991
Section 9, Marked for Changes
Page 4
\~~.4
DRAFT
Endnotes
1. Insert current rate resolution number.
2. Insert current date of adoption of resolution.
3. Historic anomaly; of no future legislative value.
4. City should have the option to reduce rates in cost indices
reduce.
5. Since the concept is to avoid Council review for perfunctory
increases in CPI, it is illogical to require Council review for an
"index" change. The City Manager should be authorized to approve
any new index--an unlikely event--unless a Council person requests
Council review.
6. This avoids the problems of proof if a Notice of Intention is
miscommunicated or "lost in the mail."
trash34.wp
August 9, 1991
section 9, Marked for Changes
Page 5
\ ~A -$
RESOLUTION NO. II.- ~ 0 I
DRAFT
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING, AFTER
PUBLIC HEARING, RATES FOR COLLECTION AND
DISPOSAL OF SOLID WASTE EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 1991
WHEREAS, in February, 1991, in accordance with the Franchise
Ordinance, Laidlaw Waste Systems gave the City Notice of Intention
to apply for a rate increase; and
WHEREAS, the City Council called for a public hearing of the
proposed rate increase; and
WHEREAS, City staff and Laidlaw have spent several months
negotiating a rate increase and proposed redistribution of
revenues.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, ORDER AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The rates as indicated on Attachment One for
collection and disposal of refuse are hereby approved, said rates
to be effective July 1, 1991.
Section 2. This resolution shall take and be in full force
and effect immediately upon the passage and adoption hereof.
Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and
adoption of this Resolution; shall enter the same in the book of
original Resolutions of said City; and shall make a minute of the
passage and adoption hereof in the minutes of the meeting at which
the same is passed and adopted.
Presented by:
\~~ -t
LAIDLAW WASTE SYSTEMS
HAND PICK UP RATE SCHEDULE
7/01/91
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
TYPE OF SERVICE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES
THE SECOND AND FOR EACH
ADDITIONAL RESIDE~TIAL UNIT
IN MULTIPLE DWELLING
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL
UP TO (2) 40 GAL. CONTAINERS
ONE TIME WEEKLY
UP TO (2) 40 GAL. CONTAINERS
TWO TIMES WEEKLY
UP TO (2) 40 GAL. CONTAINERS
THREE TIMES WEEKLY
ATTACHMENT 11'
RESIDENTIAL RATES
2/01/91
RATE
10/01/90 (ADDS 7/01/91 (1)
RATE RECYCLE) RATE
$9.46 $10.56 $11.29
$6.81 $ 7.91 $ 8.60
$10.50
$18.87
$27.82
$10.50
$18.87
$27.82
TRAILER PARKS & MOTELS (CENTRAL LOCATION) PER UNIT
MINIMUM PER MONTH
TWO TIMES WEEKLY
THREE TIMES WEEKLY
FOUR TIMES WEEKLY
DAILY PICK UP (6 TIMES WEEKLY)
$17.73
$ 6.24
$ 7.90
$ 9.46
$10.86
$17.73
$ 6.24
$ 7.90
$ 9.46
$10.86
TRAILER PARKS (INDIVIDUAL CAN SERVICE) PER UNIT
ONE COLLECTION WEEKLY
TWO COLLECTIONS WEEKLY
$ 6.81
$ 9.10
$ 6.81
$ 9.10
$11.22
$20.17
$29.74
$18.59
$ 6.92
$ 8.60
$10.19
$11.61
$ 7.50
$ 9.82
(1)
RATES THAT WOULD BE EFFECTIVE 7/01/91 IF COUNCIL APPROVES
ALTERNATIVE 2 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
\ ;~- ..3
LAIDLAW WASTS SYSTEMS
CITY OF CHULA VISTA ATTACH~1ENT 'II
COMMERCIAL BIN RATES --
JULY 1, 1991 COMMERCIAL
BIN RATES
:-----MINIMUM-----: :-----MAXIMUM-----:
NO. NO. WEEKLY RATE AT RATE AT RATE AT RATE AT
BINS PICK UPS 6-30-91 7-1-91 6-30-91 .. 7-1-91
------------------- -------------------- --------------------
1 1 $54.95 $59.22 $64.80 $69.40
1 2 $91.50 $99.43 $108.90 $117.41
1 3 $126.60 $138.15 $152.65 $165.06
1 4 $166.40 $181.72 $198.45 $214.83
1 5 $204.20 $223.22 $244.40 $264.75
1 6 $244.10 $266.89 $295.80 $320.30
1 7 $289.70 $316.46 $343.80 $372.35
2 , $97.75 $105.89 $118.90 $127.74
2 2 $177.85 $193.55 $201.70 $218.19
2 3 $235.55 $258.06 $273.65 $297.42
2 4 $304.95 $334.66 $352.30 $383.58
2 5 $381.30 $418.45 $426.90 $465.55
2 6 $465.20 $510.03 $520.85 $567.52
2 7 $549.10 $601.61 $608.70 $663.18
3 1 $140.90 $152.92 $173.50 $186.60
3 2 $243.25 $266.02 $285.40 $309.56
3 3 $332.45 $365.53 $426.35 $462.53
3 4 $442.40 $486.47 $497.10 $542.98
3 5 $552.10 $607.16 $609.90 $666.88
3 6 $686.35 $753.21 $711.15 $778.83
3 7 $832.75 $911.82 $863.35 $943.43
4 1 $184.60 $200.52 $226.10 $243.39
4 2 $306.50 $336.27 $360.00 $391. 54
4 3 $436.25 $480.12 $502.30 $548.36
4 4 $596.35 $655.33 $633.85 $694.07
4 5 $760.85 $835.09 $776.30 $851.05
4 6 $925.75 $1,015.25 $981.25 $1,072.59
4 7 $1,090.45 $1,195.21 $1,145.85 $1,252.45
5 1 $225.80 $245.54 $276.25 $297.65
5 2 $392.00 $429.50 \ $441. 60 $480.74
5 3 $562.75 $618.17 $571. 55 $627.26
5 4 $741.35 $814.94 ,$772.35 $846.97
5 5 $913.60 $1,005.15 $1,021.10 $1,116.21
5 6 $1,090.45 $1,200.12 $1,236.05 $1,350.54
5 7 $1,311.75 $1,441.01 $1,343.06 $1,473.35
6 1 $266.95 $290.50 $326.95 $352.49
6 2 $468.25 $513.18 $514.50 $560.96
6 3 $664.95 $731.11 $711. 00 $778.68
6 4 $857.15 $944.38 $929.20 $1,018.82
6 5 $1,052.45 $1,160.86 \ ~~- ~ $1,184.45 $1,297.23
6 6 $1,261.40 $1,391.45 $1,468.35 $1,605.24
~ ~ ...~ AOO r:r: ..1 ~Jlt'I ~':l ,~~, ..'7n!L__~i..L,~ ~ '> -r A
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item J if
Meeting Date 08/13/91
SUBMITTED BY:
Resolution lit;, !;lO2.., Making a Finding that InterwestPacific, Ltd.
is Not a Responsive Bidder; Rejecting the Lowest Bid; Waiving
Immaterial Deviations in the Second Lowest Bid; Accepting the Second
Lowest Bid; and Awarding the Contract for "Storm Drain Improvements
in Sierra Way from Broadway to Colorado Avenue in the City of Chula
Vista, CA" to Dietrich Corporation
Community Develo. pmett D' tor.1t
Director of Public Works
\
City Manager,Jf( ~ ~~
(4/5ths Vote: Yes _ No X)
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
The Sierra Way Storm Drain project entails installation of reinforced concrete pipe, drainage
inlets, storm drain cleanouts, removal of existing drainage channel, and placement of asphalt
concrete overlay. The Director of Public Works received nine sealed bids for Alternate A
and/or B on June 12 at 2:00 p.m. in the Public Services Building.
The lowest bid for Alternate A, from Interwest Pacific, Ltd. ("Interwest"), is not recommended
for award of contract because it failed to comply with the City's Minority and Women Business
Enterprise Construction Program (M/WBE). The contractor, who identifies himself as
Portuguese, claims that Portuguese is considered a Hispanic minority; this is in direct
contradiction to the definition of "Hispanic" contained in the City's adopted policy.
The second lowest bid for Alternate A, by Dietrich Corporation ("Dietrich"), is recommended
for award; the contractor complied with the City's Minority and Women Business Enterprise
Construction Program. The bid by Dietrich for Alternate A is $310,974; it is $339 higher than
the low bid.
Dietrich failed to list a subcontractor and to properly complete the City of Chula Vista Party
Disclosure Form. These deviations did not affect the amount of the bid nor did it give Dietrich
an advantage over other bidders. Dietrich has submitted a supplemental Party Disclosure Form.
These deviations are immaterial and should be waived.
) ~ -I
Page 2, Item J y.
Meeting Date 08/13/91
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Adopt the resolution which makes the finding that Interwest Pacific, Ltd. is not a
responsive bidder as it failed to comply with the City's Minority and Women Business
Enterprise Construction Program; and waiving immaterial deviations in second lowest bid
of Dietrich Corporation.
2. Reject the lowest bid for Alternate A by Interwest Pacific, Ltd., accept the second lowest
bid for Alternate A by Dietrich Corporation as the lowest responsive and responsible
bidder, and award the contract for "Storm Drain Improvements in Sierra Way from
Broadway to Colorado Avenue in the City of Chula Vista, CA" to Dietrich Corporation in
the amount of $310,974.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
On June 12, the Public Works Director received nine bids for the Sierra Way Storm Drain
project. The project was bid with two Alternates: Alternate A was installation of dual 33"
diameter reinforced concrete pipe; Alternate B was installation of 34" x 53" horizontal elliptical
reinforced concrete pipe. The bids received from the nine contractors for Alternate A and
Alternate B were as follows:
Alternate A Alternate B
Interwest Pacific, Ltd-Del Mar
Dietrich Corporation-EI Cajon
Caves Construction-San Diego
Walter H. Barber & Son-La Mesa
H.S. Excel Corporation-San Marcos
Mur-Vic Construction Co.-El Cajon
Arrieta Construction Inc.-EI Cajon
Roca Construction-Spring Valley
Duarte & Baum, Inc.-La Mesa
$310,635
310,974
318,040
387,782
397,880
414,301
415,710
419,701
456,789
$336,116
No bid
No bid
No bid
No bid
No bid
512,460
331,200
No bid
Based on the bid results, staff recommends awarding a contract for Alternate A (installation of
the dual 33" diameter concrete reinforced pipe).
As is required for all U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)-funded
projects, staff evaluated the lowest bids to determine the total minority and women business
enterprise (M/WBE) participation.
Itf~j.
Page3, Item 1/
Meeting Date 08/13/91
Pursuant to Executive Orders from the President and federal regulations promulgated by HUD
(see attached as Exhibit A), the City adopted an M/WBE policy in 1985 (see attached as Exhibit
B). In that policy, the City established goals of 15 percent MBE and 1 percent WBE (the
percentages were determined by the City, not HUD). Federal case law upholds the
constitutionality of local M/WBE policies implementing Federal grant programs.
The City's M/WBE policy is included in the bid documents for every HUD-funded project and
the bidders are instructed that they must comply with the City's M/WBE policy. Each bidder
is required to complete the "Contractor Questionnaire" (attached as Exhibit C) and "List of
Subcontractors" form (attached as Exhibit D); both forms are specifically used to determine
M/WBE participation.
The City's M/WBE policy reads as follows:
"The City shall require that contractors bidding on construction contracts abide by the
provisions of the Minority and Women business Enterprise (M/WBE) Construction Program and
make every effort to obtain minority and women business enterprise participation...It is the
intention of the City to award construction contracts to the lowest responsible bidder who has
achieved, or made a good faith effort to achieve, the goals for minority and women business
enterprise participation."
In order to maintain a "level playing field" for all bidders, the City must enforce it's M/WBE
policy in a consistent manner. It is unfair to award a contract to a low bidder who does not
comply with the City's M/WBE because other contractors may have submitted higher bids as
a result of their effort to comply with the City's M/WBE policy.
Under the City's M/WBE policy, contractors shall meet the City's MBE and WBE goals or
demonstrate a "good faith" effort toward achieving those goals. The "good faith" effort is
measured by specific criteria contained in the policy.
As the City does not have its own certification program for minority and women business
enterprises, staff utilizes M/WBE certification lists provided by CalTrans and the City of San
Diego. In the event that a business is not certified by either agency, the staff requires submittal
of a "Schedule A" form (attached as Exhibit E) and supporting documentation. Staff then
evaluates this documentation and makes a determination of MBE or WBE status..
Based on the "Designation of Subcontractors" form and "List of Subcontractors" form submitted
in the bid by Interwest, it achieved the following M/WBE participation:
Itf..3
Page 4, Item /1
Meeting Date 08/13/91
Amount
Percent
Certification
MBE (15% goal)
C.L. Brown and Sons
$30,000
9.65
City of San Diego
WBE (1 % goal)
Baker Concrete Cutting
1,000
0.3
CalTrans
The contractor, who identifies himself as Portuguese, claims that "Portuguese" is considered a
subgroup of the Hispanic minority group by some state and federal agencies; he has listed
himself as Hispanic on bid documents. He is not certified as a MBE by CalTrans or the City
of San Diego.
The definition of Hispanic contained in the City's M/WBE policy reads as follows:
"Hispanic - all persons of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central of South American descent
and Spanish culture. The Portuguese are excluded form the Hispanic category, and are to be
classified according to their race. "
Federal regulations for the HUD program do not define the term Hispanic nor do they
specifically include "Portuguese" as a separate minority group. The HUD regulation reads:
"For this purpose, minority group members are Black Americans, HISPANIC Americans, Native
Americans, Asian Pacific Americans and Asian Indian Americans, and Hasidic Jewish
Americans. "
There appear to be inconsistencies in federal definitions of "Minority" and "Hispanic". The
U.S. Dept. of Transportation (DOT) and Small Business Administration (SBA) have defined
"Minority", for the purpose of their programs, to include "Portuguese" as a separate category
which includes Portuguese and Brazilian people. The Federal Census classifies people according
to race and Hispanic origin so that there is a category of "White, Hispanic Origin" and other
categories of Non-white, Hispanic Origin (Black, Asian, etc.). The Federal Census does not
specifically include Portuguese as a subgroup of "Hispanic Origin" but neither are they
specifically excluded.
If CalTrans' M/WBE policy (which is consistent with DOT regulations) was applicable to this
project (and staff does not believe it is), the minority status of the prime contractor would be
irrelevant; CalTrans does not allow the prime contractor's portion to be counted toward M/WBE
goals. HUD officials have advised that DOT regulations are not applicable to this contract
award involving CDBG funds, and that HUD does not consider Portuguese a separate minority
nor subclass of Hispanic for MBE purposes.
)~ .. ~
~.."._._-~-,,,~,~"._.,~,,,.,,.,-~---_""'''.'-_'''_------~-.---
Page 5, Item ~
Meeting Date .. 08/13/91
At the pre-award meeting held on June 21, Interwest was given an opportunity to increase their
M/WBE participation by providing a list of subcontractors not required to be listed, suppliers,
and truckers. Interwest purported to increase Baker concrete Cutting from $1,000 to $3, 100 and
provided additional certified WBEs, bringing its total WBE participation to 3 percent (without
counting the purported Baker increase):
Amount
Percent
Certification
Terra Trucking
Bud's Trucking
$5,000
3,543
1.6
1.1
CalTrans
CalTrans
At the pre-award meeting, Interwest also submitted the name of Douglas Dodds, an equipment
operator, and stated that he was a MBE whose portion of the work was $20,200. Interwest
submitted a Schedule A form completed by Dodds. Staff requested supporting documentation
that Dodds was in fact a business (and not an employee) and was minority. Interwest failed to
produce any documentation and stated, at a second meeting, that Dodds had disappeared and was
unlikely to perform the work.
Since Interwest did not meet the City's M/WBE goal, staff evaluated whether or not Interwest
made a good faith effort to achieve minority business participation. Staff concluded that
Interwest did not make a good faith effort as it failed to use reasonable means specified in the
City's M/WBE policy to notify and solicit bids from M/WBEs. Interwest did not advertise or
send out direct mail, and specifically failed to notify M/WBEs regarding the curb/flatwork job
opportunity (a $20,000 portion of the work).
Due to irregularities in the bid documents submitted by Interwest, staff also evaluated
compliance with the Subcontracting Fair Practices Act (public Contract Code, Section 4100, et.
seq). This law is designed to prevent the widespread practice of "bid shopping" by the low
bidder after the opening of the sealed bids. Public Contracts law and our bid documents reserve
the right of Council to waive immaterial deviations in the bid. Staff believes that Interwest
violated this law in the following ways:
1. Interwest did not list all of subcontractors performing a portion of the work greater
than $10,000 or 0.5 percent of the total project, as required by Public Contract Code
Section 4104(a). Douglas Dodds, an equipment operator performing $20,200 of work,
was not listed on the "Designation of Subcontractors" form. As Douglas Dodds has
disappeared, this violation is not considered material and therefore could be waived
if the Council determined to award to Interwest.
2. Interwest did not accurately list the portion of work to be done by each subcontractor
as required by Public Contract Code Section 4104(b). Two contractors, C.L. Brown
IV",S
Page 6, Item -.lL
Meeting Date 08/13/91
and S.W. Concrete, were listed at "Appx 30,000" and "Appx 20,000" respectively.
Copies of the actual bids obtained by staff showed that their portion of the work was
only $28,800 and $17,557, respectively. This is a total reduction of $3,643 or 1.2
percent of the total project. Since it does not appear that the contractor engaged in bid
shopping but simply overstated the bid amounts, this violation is not considered
material and therefore could be waived if Council determined to award to Interwest.
3. S.W. Concrete of Lakeside was listed for the curb/flatwork but did not actually submit
a bid to Interwest. Southwest Construction of Fallbrook submitted a bid to Interwest
for the work, but was not listed as a subcontractor. In the event of an inadvertent
clerical error, the contractor is required to notify the City and both subcontractors
within two working days from the bid opening, as specified by Public Contract Code
Section 4107.5; Interwest failed to do this. Since S.W. Concrete does not perform
curb/flatwork and no other contractor appears to be disadvantaged by the substitution
of Southwest Construction, this violation is not considered material and therefore could
be waived if Council determined to award to Interwest.
Based on this evaluation, staff recommends that the City Council reject the bid of Interwest
Pacific, Ltd. because it did not meet the City's MBE goal, did not make a good faith effort to
meet the City's MBE goal, and therefore is not a responsive bidder.
The second lowest bidder, Dietrich Corporation, submitted a bid for Alternate A for $310,974
which is $339 more than the lowest bidder.
Staff evaluated the minority and women business participation in the bid by Dietrich. Based on
the "Designation of Subcontractors" form and "List of Subcontractors" form submitted in the
bid by Dietrich, it achieved the following M/WBE participation:
Amount
Percent
Certification
MBE (15% goal)
Caves Construction
$46,700
15
City of S.D.
WBE (1 % goal)
Baker Concrete Cutting
2,400
0.8
CalTrans
At the pre-award meeting held on June 21st, Dietrich was given an opportunity to increase their
M/WBE participation by providing a list of subcontractors not required to be listed, suppliers,
and truckers. Dietrich provided additional certified WBEs, bringing its total WBE participation
to 7.2 percent:
11f~~
Page 7, Item li-
Meeting Date 08/13/91
Amount
Percent
Certification
D. L. C. and C. Trucking
$20,000
6.4
Schedule A form
As Dietrich achieved the City's M/WBE goals, no evaluation of "good faith effort" was
required.
D. L. C. and C. Trucking was not listed on the Designation of Subcontractors form even though
their work exceeds $10,000. This is a violation of the Public Contracts Code, which requires
listing of all subcontractors over .5 percent or $10,000. Staff finds that, generally, contractors
do not list their truckers or suppliers on bid documents unless it is specifically requested. Since
it does not appear that Dietrich engaged in bid shopping and this violation did not affect the total
amount of the bid, it is not considered material and the proposed resolution so finds and waives
the violation.
Although Dietrich did not properly complete the City of Chula Vista "Party Disclosure" form,
technically part of the bid package, staff requested and received a supplemental Party Disclosure
form from Dietrich (attached as Exhibit C). This mistake did not affect the amount of the bid
nor give Dietrich an advantage over other bidders. It is not considered material and the
proposed resolution so finds and waives the defect.
Staff recommends that the City Council award the contract for Sierra Way Storm Drain
Improvements to Dietrich Corporation as they are the lowest responsive bidder.
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
The bid by Dietrich Corporation is for Alternate A is below the City Engineer's estimate of
$381,198 by $70,224 or 18 percent.
Funds Required for Construction
Contract Amount
Contingencies (approx. 8.5 %)
Staff design and inspection
Water facilities relocation
Total Funds Required
$ 310,974.00
26,948.21
68,000.00
71.322.00
$ 477,244.21
1~~7
Page 8, Item 1.1.-
Meeting Date 08/13/91
Funds Available for Construction
Sierra Way Storm Drain Broadway to Colorado (DR 104)
CDBG
Gas Tax Revenue
General Fund
Total Funds Available
$ 273,000.00
179,323.32
24.920.89
$ 477,244.21
FISCAL IMPACT: This reflects an expenditure of funds authorized in the CIP budget as
indicated. Upon completion of the project it will require routine City maintenance.
EXHIBIT LIST
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Exhibit C
Exhibit D
Exhibit E
Exhibit F
Exhibit G
HUD Regulation 48CFR Section 2426.101
City of Chula Vista Minority and Women Business Enterprise Construction Program
Contractors Questionnaire Form
List of Subcontractors Form
Schedule A Form N()r .eAAJ~6-/)
Party Disclosure Forms submitted by Dietrich
Party Disclosure Form submitted by Interwest
[C:\WP51 \CQUNCIL\SIERRA.l13]
Itf,~
_"__'.". ~"..~_,.._..,". ,~",~_",~_~".,,,.,~,,___.",,__,o"m__'_".'_~____'~'__'_"
RESOLUTION NO.
/~ ! 02-
DRAFT
MAKING A FINDING THAT INTERWEST PACIFIC, LTD. IS NOT A
RESPONSIVE BIDDER; REJECTING THE LOWEST BID; WAIVING
IMMATERIAL DEVIATIONS IN THE SECOND LOWEST BID; ACCEPTING
THE SECOND LOWEST BID; AND AWARDING THE CONTRACT FOR
"STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS IN SIERRA WAY FROM BROADWAY
TO COLORADO AVENUE IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CA" TO
DIETRICH CORPORATION
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DOES HEREBY RESOLVES as
follows:
WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works received sealed bids for "Storm Drain
Improvements in Sierra Way from Broadway to Colorado Avenue in the City of Chula Vista,
CAli on June 12, 1991 at 2:00 p.m. in the Public Services Building; and,
WHEREAS, funds for this multi-year project have been previously appropriated
from Federal Housing and Urban Development (Community Development Block Grant), Gas
Tax, and General Fund revenues; and,
WHEREAS, the work includes but is not limited to installation of reinforced
concrete pipe, drainage inlets, storm drain cleanouts, removal of existing drainage channel, and
placement of asphalt concrete overlay; and,
WHEREAS, bids were received from nine contractors for Alternate A and
Alternate B as follows:
Alternate A Alternate B
Interwest Pacific, Ltd-Del Mar
Dietrich Corporation-EI Cajon
Caves Construction-San Diego
Walter H. Barber & Son-La Mesa
H.S. Excel Corporation-San Marcos
Mur-Vic Construction Co.-EI Cajon
Arrieta Construction Inc.-EI Cajon
Roca Construction-Spring Valley
Duarte & Baum, Inc.-La Mesa
$310,635
310,974
318,040
387,782
397,880
414,301
415,710
419,701
456,789
$336,116
No bid
No bid
No bid
No bid
No bid
512,460
331,200
No bid
WHEREAS, the City is desirous of awarding a contract for Alternate A; and,
WHEREAS, staff evaluated the performance and effort of the lowest bidder,
Interwest Pacific, Ltd. ("Interwest") in meeting the City's Minority Business Enterprise (MBE)
and Women Business Enterprise (WEE) Construction program goals of 15 % MBE and 1 % WBE
participation; and,
-1-
It./..q
WHEREAS, Interwest is not itself considered a MBE under the City's adopted
policy and only achieved an MBE participation of 9.3%; and,
WHEREAS, staff evaluated whether or not Interwest made a "good faith" effort
in soliciting MBE participation and, after reviewing information provided by the contractor,
determined that Interwest failed to make a good faith effort because it failed to use reasonable
means specified in the City's adopted policy to notify and solicit bids from minority business
enterprises; and,
WHEREAS, Dietrich's incomplete response on the "Party Disclosure" form has
been cured by submission of a properly completed form, resulting in no advantage or price
difference in the bid. The bid. deviation is immaterial and should be waived by Council; and,
WHEREAS, Dietrich's bid failed to list D.L.C. and C. Trucking on the
Designation of Subcontractors form as a subcontractor receiving in excess of $10,000 ofthe total
contract, but was not the result of bid shopping and did not affect the total amount of the bid,
was considered immaterial and should be waived by Council; and
WHEREAS, staff evaluated the performance of the second lowest bidder, Dietrich
Corporation ("Dietrich") in meeting the City's Minority Business Enterprise (MBE) and Women
Business Enterprise (WBE) Construction program goals of 15 % MBE and 1 % WBE
participation, and found that Dietrich achieved said goals; and,
WHEREAS, applicable Federal Housing of Urban Development rules and
regulations require that the City award a firm fixed-price contract to the lowest responsive and
responsible bidder whose bid conforms with all the material terms and conditions of the
invitation for bids including achieving the City's MBE/WBE goals or establishing a good faith
effort to do so.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, ORDER, AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council does hereby find the above recited facts to be true,
and based on these facts, finds that Interwest is not a responsive bidder; waives the immaterial
deviations in Dietrich's bid; and finds that Dietrich is a responsive and responsible bidder.
Section 2. The City Council does hereby reject the lowest bid by Interwest, accept
the second lowest bid by Dietrich as the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, and award
the contract for "Storm Drain Improvements in Sierra Way from Broadway to Colorado Avenue
in the City of Chula Vista, CA" to Dietrich Corporation in the amount of $ 310,974 to be
completed in accordance with the specifications approved by the Director of Public Works.
Section 3. The City Council does hereby direct and authorize the Mayor of the
City of Chula Vista to execute said contract for and on behalf of the City of Chula Vista.
Section 4. This resolution shall take and be in full force and effect immediately
upon the passage and adoption hereof.
-2-
(L/:...(/)
DRAFT
Section 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this
Resolution; shall enter the same in the book of original Resolutions of said City; and shall make
a minute of the passage and adoption hereof in the minutes of the meeting at which the same is
passed and adopted.
Presented by:
Approved as to form by:
Chris Salomone
Director of Community Development
D. Richard Rudolf
Assistant City Attorney
John P. Lippitt
Director of Public Works
[C:\WP51 \CQUNCIL\SIERRA.RES]
I~'I/I/J/-/Z
t{u~_~~r-~/~_1l A
--
citatio'n
48 CFR 2426.101
48 C.F.R. 2426.101
Rank(R)
R 1 OF 1
Database
CFR
Mode
P
CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS
TITLE 48--FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATIONS SYSTEM
CHAPTER 24--DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
SUBCHAPTER E--GENERAL CONTRACTING REQUIREMENTS
PART 2426--0THER SOCIOECONOMIC PROGRAMS
Subpart 2426.1--Minority Business Enterprises
2426.101 Policy.
It is the policy of the Department to foster and promote MINORITY BUSINESS
ENTERPRISE (MBE) participation in its procurement program, to the extent
permitted by law and consistent with its primary mission. A "MINORITY BUSINESS
ENTERPRISE" is a business which is at least 51 percent owned by one or more
minority group members; or, in case of a publicly-owned business, one in which
at least 51 percent of its voting stock is owned by one or more minority group
members, and whose management and daily business . s are controlled by
one or more such individuals. For this purpose minority oup members are
Black Americans, HISPANIC Americans, Native American, 'an Pacific Americans
and Asian Indian Americans, and Hasidic Jewish Americans.
PART 2426--0THER SOCIOECONOMIC PROGRAMS
Source: 53 FR 46536, Nov. 17, 1988; 54 FR 8336,
otherwise noted.
nless
48 C. F. R. 2426.101
48 CFR 2426.101
END OF DOCUMENT
\
i
14 ~ /3
EX,HI;BIT ;8
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
MINORITY AND WOMEN BUSINESS ENTERPRISE CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM
1. Objective
To establish goals for the participation of minority business
enterprises and women business enterprises in City of Chula Vista
construction contracts and to establish a program for the achievement of
the goal s.
II. Definitions
i
1. Minority group member - a person who is Black, Hispanic, Asian or
Pacific Islander, or Native American.
(a) Black - all persons descended from the original peoples of the
Black racial groups of Africa.
(b) Hispanic - all persons of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban,
Central or South Ameri can descent and Spani sh cul tu reo The
Portuguese are excluded from the Hispanic category, and are to
be classified according to their race.
(c) Asian or Pacific Islander - all persons descended from any of
the ori gi nal peopl es of the Far East, Southeast Asi a, the
Indian Subcontinent, or the Pacific Islands.
(d) Native American - all persons descended from any of the
original peoples of North America.
2. Minority Business Enterprise (MBE) - A. United States business
wherein the minority group members or stockholders have at least
50% ownership interest in the business and possess control over
management, capital and earnings. If the business is publicly
owned, the minority group members or stockholders must have at
least 51% ownership interest in the business and possess control
over management capital and earnings.
3. Women Business Enterprise (WBE) - A United States business wherein
women members or stockholders have at least 50% ownership interest
in the business and possess control over management, capital and
earnings. If the business is publicly owned, the women members or
stockholders must have at least 51% ownership interest in the
business and possess control over management, capital and earnings.
4. Small Business Enterprise (SBE) - A business which meets the
definition of a minority business enterprise or women business
enterprise, and in addition, meets the small business size
standards of the Small Business Administration (Exhibit A).
5. Contractor The individual, partnership, corporation, joint
venture or other 1 egal enti ty enteri ng into a contract wi th the
Ci ty of Ch ul a Vi sta.
III .,/~
6. Subcontractor - An indivi dual partnership, corporati on or other
legal entity entering into a contract with the contractor to
perform a portion of the work.
II 1. Goal s
The Mi nori ty and Women Bu si ness Enterpri se Constructi on Program
establishes the following goals:
1. A goal of 15% of the contract amount for the participati on of
minority business enterprises from South San Diego Bay area
construction contracts.
(a) 50% of the Mi nori ty Bu s i ness Enterpri ses shoul d qualify as
small business enterprises.
2. A goal of 1% of the contract amount for the participation of women
business enterprises from South San Diego Bay area in City of Chula
Vista construction contracts.
(a) 50% of the women business enterprises should qualify as small
business enterprises.
(b) A business owned by minority women will be counted towards
fulfillment of the goal for the participation of women
business enterprises and minority business enterprises.
I V. Program
The City shall require that contractors bidding on construction
contracts abi de by the provi si ons of the Mi nori ty and Women Busi ness
Enterprise Construction Program and make every effort to obtain minority
and women business enterprise participation. Failure to provide the
i nformati on referenced in vari ous secti ons of thi s program will resul t
in a determination by the City that the contractor is not a responsible
bidder. It is the intention of the City to award construction contracts
to the lowest responsible bidder who has achieved, or made a good faith
effort to achieve, the goals for minority and women business enterprise
participation.
In order to address the-goals for minority and women business enterprise
construction participation, the contractor may award a portion(s) of the
contract to bona fi de mi nori ty or women-owned fi rms, equi pment
operators, brokers, and suppl iers or prefabricators. A minority or
women business enterprise will be considered bona fide if the minority
or women group members' ownership interests are real and continuing, and
not created solely to meet the City's goals for minority and women
business enterprise construction participation. The minority or women
business enterprise must perform work or provide services and/or
suppl i es and not merely act as a passi ve condui t. Where a mi nori ty or
women business enterprise acts as a broker or agent, only the commission
or fee earned may be counted towards the contractor's goal s. Thi s
commission or fee will not be counted if the minority or women business
enterprise performs no substantive service.
ILt,IE
In the event the City has reason to question the ownership of a minority
or women busi ness enterpri se, the burden of proof is on the cl aimant
and/or contractor to provide documentation to substantiate the minority
or women ownership of the business. The City will not automatically
accept the determination of another agency in this matter.
V. Joi nt Ventures
Whenever a joint venture involves a business owned by minorities or
women, the contractor shall provide the City with a full account of the
nature of the minority or women ownership interest, the basis for the
creation of the joint venture, and the particular financial
participation and administrative responsibilities of the interested
parties. Such joint venture, partnership or other multi-entity
relationship shall ensure that the participating business owned by
minorities or women has a commensurate share of the profit or loss to be
realized from the joint venture.
The j oi nt venture, partnership or other mul ti-entity rel ati onship shall
be in writing. Joint ventures, partnerships or other multi-entity
relationships must conform to the pertinent laws which govern the
creati on of such busi ness arrangements. The Ci ty shall have the ri ght
to revi ew same and determi ne if such arrangement is proper wi thi n the
requirements of the Minority and Women Business Enterprise Construction
Program.
The dollar amount of the joint venture, which is to apply towards the
goals for minority or women participation, is calculated by the
following formula:
Joint
Venture X
Contract
$ Amount
% of Mi nori ty or
Women Joint Venture =
Financial Participation
$ of Joint
Venture Applicable
To Goals
VI. Bi d Process
Contractors shall notify minority and women contractor associations, and
business development centers of their intention to solicit minority and
women business enterprise participation at least two weeks prior to the
bid opening. Such notification shall be by registered or certified
mail. Contractors shall also seek out minority or women subcontractors
by making positions and opportunities known to the news media servicing
minority and women contractors and subcontractors. This outreach effort
must be judged acceptable by the City.
So as to afford minori ty and women suppl iers and prefabri cators an
opportunity to participate in the work, contractors shall notify
minority and women supplier associations or clearinghouses of their
supply or prefabrication needs at least two weeks prior to the bid
opening. Such notification shall be by registered or certified mail.
1. Bi d Openi ng - In addi ti on to any other documents required by the
bid specifications, the contractor shall submit the Contractor
Questionnaire (Exhibit C) and the List of Subcontractors (Exhibit
0).
) ,+~//P
2. Pre-award Meeti ng - The apparent low bi dder wi 11 be requi red to
attend a pre-award meeting to determine compliance with the
Mi nori ty and Women Busi ness Enterpri se Constructi on Program. The
low bidder shall submit a complete list of subcontractors,
suppliers, truckers, and owner/operators of equipment to be used on
the project. This list should include name, address, telephone
number, trade, contact person(s), and the total dollar amount of
the subcontract. The contractor shall also indicate the businesses
claiming to be owned by minorities or women.
Minority or women business enterprises which have not been
certified as such by the City shall submit a Schedule A Form,
Minority and Women Business Enterprise Eligibility Questionnaire
and/or Joint Venture (Exhibit E). Minority or women business
enterpri ses enteri ng into a joi nt venture with another busi ness
shall also submit a Schedule A Form.
Pri or to the pre-award meeti ng, the contractor and subcontractor
are required to submit the Section 3 Employment and Contracting
Pl an Format (Exhi bit B).
3. Pre-construction Meeting - Upon request, the contractor shall
provi de a copy of all subcontractor agreements or other
verification of the total amount to be paid to each subcontractor.
VII. Evaluation
If the contractor has not achi eved the goal s for mi nori ty and women
business enterprise participation, the City shall determine whether the
contractor made a good faith effort to achieve the goals. This
detennination will be done by reviewing the documentation submitted by
the contractor.
Good faith documentation submitted by the contractor shall, as a
minimum, include the following:
(a) Report o.f responses, proposals, and bids received from minority and
women owned businesses. This report shall indicate the action
taken by the contractor in response to the proposal sand/or bi ds
received from minority or women businesses and from joint ventures
which include minority or women businesses. In cases where
proposal sand/or bi ds have been rejected by the contractor, the
reason(s) for rejection shall be indicated.
(b) Documented contacts with minority and women owned finns, minority
and women contractors' associ ati ons, mi nority and women busi ness
development centers, or any other related agency which disseminates
bid information to minority and women business enterprises.
(c) Copy of regi stered or certifi ed 1 etters sent to groups in (b)
notifying them of the contractor's intent to solicit minority and
women business enterprise participation.
Itf'(I
(d) Descri pti on of assi stance provi ded to mi nori ty and women owned
finns relative to obtaining plans and specifications, reviewing
sub-bid requirements, and referrals for bonding requirements.
(e) Documentation of efforts undertaken to encourage subcontractors to
obtain minority and women business enterprise participation.
(f) Documentation of methods used in soliciting bids from minority and
women subcontractors or suppliers such as, but not limited to,
advertisements in the Daily Construction Service, minority and
women trade association publications, local minority newspapers, or
other appl icabl e daily or weekly newspapers or trade journal s or
other media.
(g) Documented contacts with minority and women brokers or agents and
minority and women owner/operators of equipment.
(h) Documentati on of any other effort undertaken by the contractor to
encourage minority and women business enterprise participation.
VIII.Protest Procedure - Appeal Procedure
In the event a detenni nati on is made that the apparent low bi dder has
not made a good faith effort to achieve the minority and women business
enterprise participation goals, said party shall have the right to
protest such detenni nati on before the Ci ty Council. The Ci ty shall
notify said party by certified or registered mail of the date when the
City Council will consider the rejection of the bid of the apparent low
bidder and also hear and consider the protest. If the Council sustains
the detennination that a good faith effort was not made, the Council
shall award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder.
IX. Program Review
The Minority and Women Business Enterprise Construction Program will be
periodically reviewed by the City Manaqer. Changes in the program which
are required. to effectively administer the program may be made by the
City Manager.
J 4: ~I i
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
CONTRACTOR QUESTIONNAIRE
EXHIBIT C
FIRM NAME
Da te :
Phone:
STREET ADDRESS
CITY
STATE
ZIP
MAILING ADDRESS
CITY
STATE
ZIP
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TYPE OF ORGANIZATION
Check
Individual
Corporati on
Partnership
Name of Owner
State of Incorporation
(Indicate [G] General, [L] Limited)
Name of Partners
Joint Venture
Joint Venture Participants
Local Address
=========================================================================================
OWNERSHIP INTEREST
Asian or
Black His anic Native American Pacific Islander Caucasian Women
Number
Percentage
Minority
14
Non-Minority
Women
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMPOSITION OF EMPLOYEES
ac 1 spam c a lve en can aCl lC s an er aucaSlan omen
Number
'1, ot Total
Employment
at Bidders'
Address
B1 k HO
N t"
Am
Asian or
P Of 0 I 1 d
C
W
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOR CITY USE ONLY (LEAVE BLANK)
_xp1ain whether current work force is racially proportionate to the area from which the
work force is drawn (National, State, or Local).
} '-t -- 1'1
WPC 1347E
EXHIBIT D
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
LIST OF SUBCONTRACTORS
NAME OF SUPPLI ER
MINORITY AND WOMEN SUPPLIERS
ADDRESS AND PHONE NO.
WPC 1333E
1~'J.j)
EXHIBIT E
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SCHEDULE A
MINORITY AND WOMEN BUSINESS ENTERPRISE ELIGIBILITY OUESTIONNAIRE
AND/OR JOINT VENTURES
1. Name of firm
2. Address of firm
Zip Code
Ci ty
S ta te
3. Phone Number of firm
4. Indicate whether firm is sole proprietorship, partnership, joint venture,
corporation or other business entity (please specify).
5. Nature of firm's business
6. Year(s) firm has been in business under present ownership
7. OWnershi p of fi rm: Identify those who control 5 percent or more of the
firm's ownership. Columns E and F should be filled out only if the firm
is less than 100 percent minority owned.
!A B C 0 E F
NAME RACE SEX YEARS OF OWNERSHIP VOT! NG
OWNERSHIP PERCENTAGE PERCENTAGE
With firms of less than 100 percent minority or women ownership, list the
contributions of money, equipment, real estate, or expertise of each of
the owners.
NAME MONEY EQUIPMENT ; REAL ESTATE EXPERTISE
\
I'lf ~ '--I
Schedule A (cont)
8. Control of firm: (a) identify by name, race, sex, and title those
individuals (including owners and non-owners) who are responsible for
day-to-day management and policy decision making, including, but not
limited to, those with prime responsibility for:
(1) Financial decisions
(2) Management decisions, such as:
a. Estimating
b. Marketing and sales
c. Hiring and firing of management personnel
d. Purchases of major items or supplies
(3) Supervision of field operations
9. For each person 1 i sted in answers to questi on 8, provi de a bri ef summa ry
of the person's experi ence and number of years wi th the fi rm. Indi cate
the person's qualifications for the responsibilities given him or her.
10. Describe or attach a copy of any stock options or other ownership options
that are outstanding, and any agreements between owners or between owners
and third partfes which restrict ownership or control of minority or women
owners.
11. Identify any owner (see item 7) or management official (see item 8) of the
firm who is or has been an employee of another firm that has an ownership
interest in or a present business relationship with the named firm.
Present business relationships include shared space, equipment, financing,
or employees as well as each firm having some the same owners.
12. What are the gross receipts of the firm for each of the last two years?
Year endi ng
Year endi ng
$
$
1l!,3.Z-
Schedule A (cont)
13. Name of bondi ng company, if any:
Bonding 1 imit
Source of 1 etters of credit, if any
14. Do you have authority to do business in the state as well as locally, and
do you have all necessary business licenses?
15. Indicate if this finn or other finns with any of the same officers have
previously received or been denied certification or participation as an
MBE or WBE and describe the circumstances. Indicate the name of the
certifying authority and the date of such certification or denial.
(Attach additional sheets, if necessary. )
Affidavit
liThe undersigned swears that the foregoing statements are true and correct and
include all material infonnation necessary to identify and explain the
operations of (name of finn) as well as the
ownership thereof. Furthermore the undersigned agrees to provide through the
pri me contractor or directly to the Ci ty, current, comp1 ete and accurate
infonnation regarding actual work perfonned on the project, the payment
therefor and any proposed changes, if any, of the foregoing arrangements and
to permit the audit and examination of books, records and files of the finn.
The undersigned understands that any material misrepresentation will be
grounds for tennination by the City of any contract which may be awarded and
for i ni ti ati on by the Ci ty or by HUD of acti on under Federal or State 1 aws
concerning false statements."
NOTE: If, after filing this Schedule A and before the work of this finn is
comp1 eted on the contract covered by thi s regu1 ati on, there is any
significant change in the information submitted, you must infonn the
City of the change directly or through the prime contractor.
Si gnature
Name
Ti t1 e
Date
State of
County of
Attach appropriate notary.
WPC 1332E
1'1 ' 2J~
..
~.
, -+.
,...
EXHIBIT F
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PAR1Y DISCLOSURE STATEIUENT
Statc:ment of disclosure of certain ownership interests, payments. or campaign contributions, on all m~lttt:rs
,vhich will require discretionary action on the part of the City' Council, Planning Commission, and all ,)ther
ufficial bodies. The following information must be disclosed:
1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest 10 the contract, i.e., contractor,
subcontractor, material supplier.
AI~ S/,,~ - ~""h.~~ 844- s:....t- /";~""J.f
~ d.... L..: ( ~..,I - I #
An-. ~ - I.
"
If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all
individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership
interest in the partnership. ~
...:Til1C.k- NI t;k.c, /;t;) "!~ - /d~~ 0
..
.).
If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit organization or a trust,. list the names
of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or
trustor of the trust.
~OA/E
Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the City statI,
Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months? Yes_
~o -X-. If yes, please indicate person(s):
"
Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants or ind~pendent
c'l!!tractors who you have ~ned to represent you before the City in this matter.
~fk.k JJ ivkl> JI9JS
(l.
I lave you and/or your otTlcers or agents, in the aggregate, contrihuled more than $ J .000 to a
Coul1cilmember in the current or preceding eJection period'? Yes No A If yes. state which
Councilmember( s):
P,'r-l In is defined as: "AllY illdil'idllll!, prl1l, co-parmasl1ip, joint \'CllWr(', associllfiol/. socia! ell/I" /i'mema! or1-:allizmioll. corporation,
CSIII/e. IruSt, rcceiI'C'r, syndicate. tlIis alld l/IlY OIlIer COllllty, ciry and COII/lfl)', city. l1/LIllicil'iIlity, district or otlIi'l' political SIII,di\'isiOlI.
"I' (lilY otllel' group or cOl1/himuivn acting as (/ ullit."
D;it~:
(:\OTE: Attach aJdilional pages a..; nCl'\.:s~ary)
! \ . '\1)1<;('1 OSI.! '\TI
ft;-/2--ct{
~
Itf~2i
/ S'~naturc of contractor/:lpplic<lnt
--~~~a_~.e.:s_r~~~4{
Prtllt or tYlw 1);Illll' 01 Clllltl ;lclllr;:lppll<'::lI11
jiI,'\!'. Ii I:
.',r''Itq
EXHIBIT G p. 1
.'
THE CITY OF CHUU ~'JSTA PARD' DISCLOSURE STATEAJENT
~"'
Statt.:ment of disclosure of certain ownersL.' interests. payments. or campClign contributions, on all I1i:lttl';~'
'",hlch will require discretionary action on L,-.: part of the City Council, Planning Commission, and all ,Hht"
u1'fkial bodies. The following information ml1st be disclosed:
1. . List the names of all persons hnvin;; a financial interest In the contract, i.e., contractor.
subcontr~t~r, material supplier.
~ .JJ. /1;'7'I1.Ic..H Co I.P
~
. "I
If any person identified pursuant to (1) abovc is (\ corporation or partnership, list the names of (1.
individuals owning more than 10",; )1' the sl1<lres in thc corporation or owning any partncrsl1il
. r..t interest in the partnership. .
I " .,. \
,j
~
-.t If any person identified pursuant t(i (I) ahove is non-profit org;lniz,ltion or 1I trust, list the nHme
of any person serving as director or the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficial)' ();'
trustor of the trust.
1J.f)j..(b'
r"
4.
Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff.
Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months'! Yes
No...x... If yes, please indicate person(s):
5. Please identify each and en~ry person. including any clgents, employees, consultants or indepcnd~n:.
contractors who you have ClSsigned ti represent you hdore the City in this matter.
ll. Have you and/or your officers or :L~t'llS. in thc ilggregilll'. Cllntrihlltl't1 l1l11n.: tl);lll $l.()()() to :1
COLlncilmember in tht:: currcllt or p:: ::cding election period'! Yes _ No -A- If Yt:s~ state which
Councilmember(s):
r\'r~lln is defined LIS: "AllY il/dh'idl/(lI..firm, CO-I'Orfllc'.' 'I..joil/! \./:I"I/r(', associ,lI;ulI. SOCIal ell/h. li"(//enwl ()/~nllblfi(Jn. C(lll'OI'II/ioll,
C'Slelle. Irllst, rC'ceil'cr~ .\)'llClicme. lhis (/fu/ (IllY Ollla r. :1111:. cily alld COli/ill)', cil.'., mUll/li/'t/IiI.". c/islricl or otller politico/ Sl/hdil'isiulI,
or III/yolher grollp VI' cO/llbillmivl/ (Icling {IS (/1111;1.'.
i."'" : ~
. \ I.
D;~t~:
.0
. (~OTE: 'Attach :1l1ditional Iwgcs :1" I1l'l'(;'~:Iry)
1.\;: r:. \:I)IS('! .OSL:IXT\
~ : :.:\! : II .
1/f,;.S
Sign lllll' ()r rlll1trarlor/;lpplir,lIlt
-_?~~. r d21i?~____
Prilll (II' tYllt' llall1l' ()I r01l1 I ;1l'llIr/;IJ~plic:llll,
1I~1'\'I'"d J 1 '.11,'1111
. .~~..... ...... '.' ....-., .............~ ,...~.......
\ . \ '~1' 'l >Uo. ..... ~ .
EXHIBIT G p. 2
THE CITy OF CHUI.A V.iSTA PARTY DISC!.Osr!1?f:: STIfTF.MRNT
Statement of disclosure of certain o\'lollership interests, payments, or campaign contributions, on all matters
which will require discretional)' action on the part of the City Counell, PlaJ.ming COnJl11issioI1, and all other
official bodies. The following information must be disclosed:
1.
List the names of all. perSOl'lS having a fina.ndal in.terest in the contract, te., contractor,
subcontractor, materI3.1 suppllcr.
.D~c -I. C T ~c:...rc. '^<~ n
~~ Eo . Fo~ .
c...::... \J c.. C", ... 0;. t_ . u_
~ kg...,.. <.,;... -,-" C:..~, ~
If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of an
individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any"partnership
interest in the partnership.
~I 9J.-~ c.~1.l1.t-....&
;r~k.. 1=0"-
~'L.h_ 'i:::.t s
't'l\~....\ ' ~
If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit orga11ization or a trust) li~t the rl~mes
of any person serving as director of the non-profit organl~tion or as trustee or be'neficiary or
tmstor of the jrust.
H..t. W'I ~,~ .
9 te.+~, c...\... r ~
~e.\~o"" &11:>A...n- V'I"\..".+1
2.
~~ ~",-"" ~.
~c:...,~ Olp.\"ne~
~
"
'-or . t <\....I..l~_.- J T
3.
4.
Ha.~e you had more than $250 worth of business tram:acted with any member of the City staff,
Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve montns? Yes_~
No ~tfycs, please indicale person(s): _ ._..__ ...~
5.
Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultantl\ or independent
contractors who you .have assigned to repre~ent you before the City in tl1is matter.
R~\.. <D~{.r'~~ __.. . ~.. .n......... ......
~~~~~b~:l~: :-
6.
Have you and/or your office-rs or agents, in tho aggregate, contributed more ~}an $1,000 to a
CQuncilmernbet in tl1e current or pr~cding electiun pel'iod? Ye~ _ No ~--n'yes, state which
Counciltnember(s):
!,~I'SOU is dt\fln~d as: '~ny illdividua" firm, cl?l'mtnus!tip, joint VtJlt!llr(:, a.f.5Qdaciorl, social Cklb, frllfemaf Qrguni;:afiol/, corpol'()lion,
alllte, rmst, receflier, Q'ndica{e, lhis and OilY ofhr,r emm(y, ciey ami CQltrll1y. dty, '7Itl1!it:lp,/fjf)~ district {IT olhcr- PQliti/;al ,Hibc!(vi,t;otl,
or O!/y of/HIr J;,'1"(IUp Or C<l1ll();lIatiOIl actill8 OS {1. unitn
(NOTU: Allndl additionlll puges <:11> m:cessary)
Date: .__., "i" - i - 7' I
S gn tu of contnlctor/ap'plicnnt
~lerlttcd GMJ" ... --
rint or type name of (:ontra~lor/appticant
{R~\'i;;t;;d.: llj:mf.'OJ
1(;;\ \VT' 51 \ C()!Jscn .\DlSCL05r-. TXT]
I t./ .. ~~
ITEM NUMBER
,'1ft
RESOLUTION NUMBER
ORDINANCE NUMBER
ITEM NUMBER REFERENCED ABOVE HAS BEEN
CONTINUED TO
SEE AGENDA PACKET FOR THIS ITEM
ON
AIJ~ D~ 1991
/7tJ",
COUNCIL AGENDA SfATEMENT
1TI1..E:
ITEM:~ \1~
MEETINGDATE:~ crt '~lcrl
Report on Potential Approaches to Council Staffing
SUBMI1TED BY: City Manage~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_NolO
At the January 24, 1991 Council Goal-Setting meeting, the Council discussed the attached
report dated January 18, 1991 regarding City Council staffing. Pages 3-5 of the report
highlighted four general options regarding Council staffing. At the meeting, some Council
interest was expressed in both options 2 & 4, with the most interest in option #4 (which
is described further below). There was a desire for staff to return with a more in depth
report which this A-113 is designed to accomplish. Several Councilmembers requested that
the City Manager review the City budget to identify potential methods for funding Council
staffing without any increase in the net City budget. There was also Council interest
expressed in forming a Council Subcommittee to further review and refine the Council
staffing issue, but the Council decided not to form a Council Subcommittee on this subject,
at least not until after the Council had considered a staff report further describing methods
of implementing Council staffing and providing funding therefore.
This report is intended to provide the follow-up information requested at the January 24
Council meeting and to provide a structure for further Council discussion and policy
direction regarding Council staffing.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council:
1. Discuss the alternative methods described in this report for implementing Council
staffing and provide further policy direction to staff (a general guide on how to
implement this is contained in the Summary section of this report).
2. Determine whether the Council wishes to form a Council Subcommittee to further
review issues related to Council staffing.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
As indicated above, at the January 24 meeting the Council expressed the most interest in
option #4 on page 5 of the attached report. This option would add the equivalent of two
full-time assistants to support the Council work effort. This would probably be in the form
of providing the equivalent of a half-time person to support each of the four
Councilmembers, with the existing Senior Management Assistant position providing support
to the Mayor and helping coordinate the activities of the four part-time assistants to try to
avoid duplication of effort. Alternatively, there could be two full-time positions that would
!>~ -L
\' ..~-I
PAGE 2, ITEM: 3.!
MEETING DATE: 4/02/91
-.
support the four Councilmembers with each Councilmember entitled to half of the time of
one of these two full-time assistants. The remainder of this report is based on the
assumption that Council is interested in pursuing the four part-time assistants as the
preferred approach to implementing option #4.
In terms of the type of support that Council assistants would provide to individual
Councilmembers, it is presumed that most of the effort would be in the areas of constituent
and community relations and policy development and review. The constituent and
community relations category would include such activities as responding to citizen
inquiries and complaints, attending meetings of various community groups on behalf of a
Councilmember, and assisting with special community events. The policy development and
review category would include information gathering, research, and helping formulate
proposals from a Councilmember for consideration by the entire City Council. The Council
assistants would also help coordinate requests for information from Councilmembers to the
City Manager's office and other City staff.
The remainder of this report addresses the following four issues:
1.
Employee status and method of selection
.-...
2. Ongoing cost and how to pay for assistants
3. Physical location and initial facilities
4. Role and coordination issues
1. EMPLOYEE STATUS AND METHOD OF SELECTION
In order to provide maximum flexibility, particularly in the scheduling of hours for Council
assistants, and to help minimize their cost, it would probably be most appropriate to have
the Council assistants as unclassified part-time hourly employees. As long as they work
fewer than 999 hours per fiscal year, employees in this status generally do not receive
benefits (e.g. paid vacation, PERS retirement or health insurance) other than Medi-Care
and (starting July 1) Social Security contributions.
There is some ambiguity in the City Charter regarding whether the Council can appoint
employees (in addition to the Secretary to the Mayor and Council) within the Office of
Mayor and City Council or whether the City Manager must make such appointments. The
City Attorney's Office is further reviewing this legal issue, but even if the City Manager is
required to make such appointments the involvement of the Councilmember to be
supported by an assistant would certainly be sought in selecting and evaluating the ~
assistant.
l1 ~ -2-
6~-~
PAGE 3, ITEM: 33
MEETING DATE: 4/02/91
If the City Attorney's Office detennines that the City Charter does not require that the City
Manager appoint the Council assistants, the City Manager's staff could assist in recruiting
and/or screening candidates if the Council so desires. The positions could be advertised
and the applications screened, with the better qualified candidates interviewed by the City
Manager's staff and the resulting top three to five candidates provided to the
Councilrnembers for final evaluation. To make this approach workable, however, the
individual Councilrnembers would need to inform the City Manager's office of their needs
in terms of scheduling the assistant's hours of work (such as evenings or weekends) and
in terms of skills that are particularly important to meet an individual Councilrnember's
support needs. This type of assistance in the selection process is entirely optional,
however, for unclassified part-time hourly employees, and it might be more efficient for the
Councilrnembers to conduct their own selection process. It should be noted, however, that
the City Attorney's Office advises that the entire City Council would need to appoint the
assistants, not individual Councilmembers.
2. ONGOING COST AND HOW TO PAY FOR ASSISTANTS
The cost of the Council assistants could vary, depending upon the level of support,
education, and experience expected of them. For purposes of discussion, however, it is
assumed that the cost of each part-time assistant would be in the range of $10,000 -
$18,000 (including Medi-Care and Social Security contributions equal to 7.65% of salary)
per year for up to 999 hours of work1 For four assistants, the total cost is thus estimated
to be between $40,000 and $72,000 per year. If a current or future Councilmember
decides not to have a Council assistant, this would reduce the cost of Council staffing
accordingly.
As Council requested, staff has prepared a list of several alternatives to cover all or part of
the cost of Council assistants so that these positions would not have an adverse impact on
the General Fund. Those alternatives are described below.
The first two alternatives involve cost reductions that are either already in progress or are
already planned:
A. The phase out of the payments to the Bonita/Sunnyside Fire Protection
District for automatic aid.
IThe City of Irvine. for example. allocates $18,000 per Councilmember for staff assistance.
t10..-3
~~ 3.
.~...~--,-,--_..-...--_..........--'""~._.",_..-~_..._.-~---'-'-_."'~--------~----
PAGE 4, ITEM: ~
MEETING DATE: 4/02/91
~
In November 1989 the City and the Bonita/Sunnyside Fire Protection District
agreed to phase out the payments the City had previously made to the
District for automatic aid response. Under this phase out program, the FY
1988-89 payments to the District of over $50,000 were reduced to $35,000
in FY 89-90, to $20,000 in FY 90-91, to $5,000 in FY 91-92, and will be
eliminated in FY 92-93. When this phase out is complete, the annual savings
to the City will be over $50,000. As indicated above, $15,000 of this
reduction is thus occurring in the current fiscal year, and an additional
$15,000 will be saved next fiscal year.
B. Elimination of the fourth Battalion Chief position in the Fire Department.
When the Montgomery area annexed to the City, the City absorbed the
Montgomery Fire Protection District staff, including its Chief as a fourth
Battalion Chief in the Chula Vista Fire Department. When he retires at the
end of December, 1991, staff is proposing that the fourth Battalion Chief
position be eliminated. This will result in a savings of approximately
$42,500 for the last half of FY 1991-92, and $85,000 for each full-year after
the position is eliminated.
Potential reimbursements to the General Fund from other funding sources could also reduce
or eliminate the net cost of Council assistants:
--...
C. Reimbursements from non-General Fund sources.
Although it is difficult to accurately project the level of reimbursements until
the cost and actual work of the Council assistants are better defined, it is
likely that a minimum of $10,000 of the cost of Council assistants could be
reimbursed to the General Fund from such sources as the Redevelopment
Agency, Sewer, and Transit funds.
The following is a potential further cost reduction that could be considered in order to help
fund the cost of the Council assistants:
D. Reduction or elimination of Council Contingency Fund.
For each of the last several years there has been $30,000 of General Fund
money and $20,000 of Redevelopment Agency funds appropriated as a
Council Contingency Fund. Focussing on just the $30,000 in the General
Fund Council Contingency Fund, the following amounts have been spent in
recent years: $8,300 in FY 1987-88, $27,000 in FY 1988-89, $18,000 in FY
1989-90, and $6,100 so far in FY 1990-91.
~..
\ ., C\ -~
~ 5 ---4f-
PAGE 5, ITEM: ~
MEETING DATE: 4/02/91
Reducing the General Fund part of the Council Contingency Fund from $30,000 to
$15,000, in conjunction with the savings and reimbursements described above in A, B, and
C, more than covers the estimated cost of the Council assistants. Obviously, retaining the
Contingency Fund at its current level, there still would be adequate savings/revenues to
cover this staffing cost.
In addition to the above items, staff has identified the following two items that are not
recommended at this point but that are potential alternatives Council might want to
consider:
E. Elimination of part or all of one full-time equivalent Clerical Aide in the
Library Circulation staff.
With the implementation of the new automated circulation system later in
April and the merger of the formerly separate audio-visual circulation staff
with the main circulation staff, staff expects there to be some efficiencies that
might allow the reduction of one full-time equivalent position. On the other
hand, Library staff predict that certain features of the new automated system
may result in higher volumes of circulation and thus increased circulation
workload. While Library staff would prefer to have an opportunity to
evaluate both the potential efficiencies and the potential circulation increase
resulting from these changes before determining whether a position could be
eliminated, this is nonetheless a possible area of reduction. The elimination
of one full-time equivalent Clerical Aide would save about $14,800 per year.
F. Elimination of a Gardener I position in Parks & Recreation Department.
Depending on the water conservation efforts that are implemented, there
may be less need for park maintenance staff. The elimination of a Gardener
I position would save approximately $32,500 per year.
3. PHYSICAL LOCATION AND INITIAL FACILITIES
There are three general approaches staff has identified for the physical location of the
Council assistants. The first approach would simply be to have the Council assistants share
the existing desk of the Councilmember the assistant would be supporting. The second
alternative would be to create a separate work area for the assistants in the back of the
Council Conference Room. This could be in the form of four separate work areas or a
common work area shared by the assistants. This alternative would require additional
furniture but would avoid what may be the congestion of having the Council assistants
share the Councilmember's desks. Using the area at the back of the Council Conference
Room for work areas for Council assistants would, however, interfere with the seating area
when the City Council, Redevelopment Agency or Board/Commission meetings are held in
rl~..S"
~o -...
~
PAGE 6, ITEM: 33
MEETING DATE: 4/02/91
-..,
the Council Conference Room unless only a very small amount of work space is provided
for the Council assistants. There are usually 3-4 meetings per month held in the Council
Conference Room that include an audience. Council may want to consider moving some
of these meetings to the Council Chambers, particularly since at a number of Council and
Agency meetings held in the last few years the Council Conference Room has not been
large enough to provide seating for everyone who wanted to attend the meetings.
The third alternative would be to add some additional office space onto the northwest end
of City Hall. The type of remodeling that would be appropriate would need to be further
reviewed if Council wished to proceed with this approach, but the cost would probably be
in the general range of $30,000 - $45,000.
In addition to determining the physical location of the Council assistants, appropriate
furniture and equipment would need to be determined. This could include desks, tables,
chairs, guest chairs, telephones, and possibly a microcomputer shared by the Council
assistants. Depending upon the degree to which furniture is shared and the equipment that
is included, the cost for furniture and equipment could range from no cost (if the assistants
simply shared the desks of the Councilmembers) up to about $10,000 (if each assistant had
their own chair, desk, guest chair, and telephone with a shared computer and printer).
4. ROLE AND COORDINATION ISSUES
--...
If the City Council decides to utilize Council assistants, there are a number of role and
coordination issues which need to be addressed. These issues have been developed after
conversations with staff in other small to medium sized cities which have Council staff.
Those issues include the following:
A. There would need to be coordination among the Council assistants,
particularly in terms of responding to the same routine citizen inquiry or
complaint. Without such coordination, a citizen who wrote a letter to each
Councilmember might receive four or five different responses, potentially
creating confusion for the citizen receiving the responses. In addition,
several different Council assistants might be contacting City staff to obtain
the information necessary to respond to the citizen letter. To avoid both the
potential for confusion and the potential for duplication of effort, some
coordination among the Council assistants would be helpful. Such
coordination could be one of the responsibilities of the existing Senior
Management Assistant position.
It should be recognized, however, that this coordination would not preclude
individual Councilmember responses on non routine issues. This could be
appropriate in relation to responses regarding a particular policy or issue
where there is a difference in position among members of the Council.
--.,
'1C4. ~
., -~ ...~
PAGE 7, ITEM: !>3
MEETING DATE: 4/02/91
B. Another issue involves the number of Council assistants. A Councilmember
could conceivably want to hire several assistants like graduate students for
a few hours each week within the amount of money allocated. The more
people involved, however, the greater the likelihood of confusion,
miscommunication, and duplication of effort. In one City, for example, each
Councilmember had $18,000 per member for part-time staff. At one time
they collectively had 17 part-time assistants involved. It reached the point
where even each Councilmember could not keep up with who was working
for whom (they called them "Gremlins") and they initiated a policy of only
one part-time assistant per Councilmember. Staff would also suggest that the
Council limit the number of Council assistants to one per Councilmember.
C. The Council assistants would be prohibited from participating or assisting in
any improper political activities as set forth in Section 707 of the City
Charter. Similarly, the Council assistants would be subject to the prohibited
acts listed in Section 305 of the City Charter relating to interference with the
City Manager or Department Heads in their performance of duties. The
Council assistants would essentially be subject to the same prohibitions as
already apply to Councilmembers themselves.
These Charter prohibitions include: (1) not using official influence to aid
any partisan political activity or solicit political contributions; (2) not using
any office or position with the City in support or opposition to candidates for
Mayor or City Council; (3) not attempting to unduly influence the City
Manager or department heads in the performance of their duties; and (4) not
performing any administrative or executive functions except those authorized
by the Charter or by ordinance; and (5) except for purposes of inquiry, not
dealing with that part of the administrative service for which the City
Manager is responsible except through the City Manager (or his designee).
D. If a Councilmember does not use his/her assistant to the extent authorized,
the Council may want to authorize the City Manager's office to assign
projects to them on a time available basis, with the Councilrnember's support
always coming first. If such assignments were appropriate, the Senior
Management Assistant could help coordinate them. In one City surveyed for
example, this was found useful to achieve maximum productivity from all of
the staff aides.
t7~....7
-~~y
PAGE 8, ITEM: ;3
MEETING DATE: 4/02/91
-....
The above issues are highlighted based on comments provided by other cities contacted
that have more experience with Council assistants. They are mentioned so that the
structure of Council staff support can be made to work as smoothly, effectively, and
efficiently as possible.
SUMMARY
It would appear that the general Council objective expressed at your January 24 meeting
could be accomplished by:
1. Creating four unclassified part-time hourly positions in the Mayor/Council
Office this current fiscal year to be funded out of the Council Contingency
Fund and/or salary savings, and directing that $40,000 be placed in next
year's Mayor/Council budget for this purpose, with at least an equal amount
of money removed from other parts of the City budget so that there will not
be a negative impact on the overall City budget.
2. Allocate no funds for furniture, since it is assumed that the staff will use
current desks and furniture in the conduct of their duties.
3.
Establish a Council subcommittee to work out in more detail with the City
Manager the "role and coordination" issues described in this report.
-..,
FISCAL IMP ACf: As described in more detail in the Discussion section of this agenda
statement, the cost of implementing Council staffing would vary, depending upon the level
of support, education, and experience expected. For four part-time assistants, the total cost
is estimated to be between $40,000 - $72,000 per year. Office space, furniture, and
equipment needs could also require one-time funding, depending on Council's policy
direction regarding facilities needs. A number of alternatives are discussed in the report
that would cover all of these costs.
.-.,
\ ? "" -c;
~;-~
January 18, 1991
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
John D. Goss, City Mana~'
City Council Staffing
At the City Council meeting of Thursday, January 24, 1991, you will be
discussing goals and objectives for the City in the coming year in an effort
to determine if there are any changes of priorities, projects to be added or
dropped, etc. It was also indicated that there was desire to discuss at this
meeting the needs of the City Council regarding staff support. By way of a
separate memo, you will receive a list of current major projects for Council
review, deliberation and feedback as to the relative importance and priority
of these projects. The purpose of this memo is to discuss the support
staffing needs of the City Council.
The City Council authorized in 1986-87 a Senior Management Assistant position
in the City Manager's Office to provide, in addition to clerical assistancel,
full-time staff support for the Mayor and members of the City Council. The
reason for this position was that the workload in the Mayor/Council Office had
increased because of the establishment of a full-time Mayor's position in
1982, the increased size of the City as a result of the Montgomery annexation
in late 1985, a number of pending complex development proposals, and more of
an emphasis on intergovernmental relations on the part of Chula Vista.
Since the creation of the Senior Management Assistant position; Chula Vista's
population has increased from 123,667 to 134,000, and the level of activity of
the City has increased with a number of new major projects being added to the
old ones.
It is difficult for staff to project what the support needs of the individual
members of the City Councilor the City Council collectively might be without
some input from the Council on these needs. The purpose of this report is to
basically provide some staffing options that would be available to the City
Council if there is a desire to increase the current staffing level. In
determining what your support needs may be, it may hinge on how you might
answer the following questions (and possibly some other questions as well.)
IIn addition to the Mayor-Council secretary, a 1/2 position was added mid-year
1984-85, and that position was made full-time in 1989-90.
11A'c:r
-~~-~
-~---~....,-....,-----'"-----~~.._~.".._.__...,~^-,..,,---_._._-_.--
-2-
1. . How active have you and will you be as a City Councilmember? Also, what
role does a Councilmember now fulfill politically.
Historically, it appears that the role of a Councilmember in Chula Vista
has been to interact with citizens, either face-to-face, by telephone, or
by letter, attend community meetings, review staff reports, make policy
decisions at City Council and Redevelopment Agency meetings and give
! policy direction for the growth and operation of the City. In a few other
cities, however, Councilmembers are becoming more politically active. In
a few cities our size, for example, Councilmembers have either a part-time
or full-time aide to help further political initiatives of that
. Councilmember, review staff reports and either underline pertinent parts
'or prepare summaries, and interact with the staff or public on behalf of
the Councilmembers.
These two descriptions of the traditional method in which City
'Councilmembers have proceeded in Chula Vista and the method utilized in
some other communities, are not designed to be complete or comprehensive
but only to give a ~ouple of illustrative scenarios that might help you
assess your answer to the question as to how active the Council job is
. now, and what political style might be utilized in performing the City
Councilmember role.
2. Also, is the existing level of support of Senior Management Assistant and
. two clerical staff sufficient and, if it is not, whether or not existing
staff should be further utilized to provide further support to the Council
or whether or not additional collective or individual support for
. Councilmembers is necessary. ~
BACKGROUND
In order to provide a range of options and to gain a better understanding of
what the practice is in other communities, I attended a session at the Annual
League of California Cities Conference in October 1990 entitled, "Large City
Session: Elected Officials Staff Forum." The purpose of attending this
meeting was to learn what some other cities might do by way of having staff
supporting elected officials. The largest city repre~ented was the:City of
Los Angeles, specifically Councilmember Joy Picus, who is elected by' .
district. It was indicated that she has 12-14 staff people plus 2 clerical
individuals to basically handle the functions of constituent relations and
policy analysis. The City of San Jose (765,207), which was the largest
Council-Manager city represented in the session, has 2 contract employees per
Councilmember. The next largest was the City of Santa Ana (287,983), which
has 2 staff people for their 7 member Council. One apparently handles
constituent relations, while the other does research on policy development.
These employees are part of the City Manager's Office that provide support to
the Mayor and Council. Finally, the City of Hayward (population 106,000) has
one full-time person that works with the City Manager supporting the Mayor and
the Council Office. That person is responsible for constituent relations,
policy analysis, research, employee newsletter, and administering the cable
t.v. and garbage franchises.
\10..-(D
~
~.
........
-3-
In terms of comparable practice throughout the State, it is very clear that
very large cities, such as San Diego, Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Jose,"
and Long Beach, have 1 or more staff people to support each Counci1member.
For medium size cities in Chu1a Vista's population range (75,000-150,000
population), of which there are approximately 50, most cities do not have
individual Council aides, although there are exceptions to this, including the
cities of Berkeley, Santa Monica, Irvine, West Hollywood and Oceanside.
locally, in comparing the third and fourth largest cities in San Diego County,
namely Oceanside and Escondido, one finds two different approaches toward
providing staff assistance to Council. In Escondido, there was a proposal to
add staff aides to support individual Councilmembers. But, apparently because
of adverse public criticism, the City Council backed away from that position
and receives support from staff in the City Manager's Office on projects in
which the Council has interest, such as recycling and construction of an arts
center.
In Oceanside, on the other hand, approximately three years ago the City
Council established a full-time aide for each member of the City Council.
Their responsibilities included arranging for celebrations and special events,
attending meetings for City Counci1members, and generally handling constituent
relations. These aides are supervised by the City Manager's Office. It is
difficult to judge the level of activity of each City, or the effectiveness of
the two City Councils, but both cities seem to be very active, there is a
general perception, although maybe not an accurate one, that the Oceanside
City Council is a little more politically oriented than Escondido.
OPTI ONS
In terms of options for the Council, there are probably an infinite number of
combinations that would be possible depending on the Council's perceived need
for additional support. It should be made clear that the City Manager and his
staff stands ready to work with any configuration of support Council desires.
It is clear in the Council-Manager form of government that the City Manager
and his staff (and this also applies to the City Attorney and the City Clerk)
are availab 1e to provide needed support to the Mayor and the City Councfl.
This is our job and our responsibility which we stand ready to perform. The
question is what form that support is ,going to take.
There appear to be at least four options that could be suggested. These are
as follows:
1. ~ Maintain the status quo, which is one Senior Management Assistant plus two
, , clerical staff.2 The disadvantage to this option is that if your current
needs for Council support are not being met, then you cannot adequately
\ fu 1f ill your role as a Counc i 1 member .
lA refinement to this would be to better use the existing resources of staff
in Administration and other support services. Option #2 is one, but only one
form that this could take.
11~ -II
~~-.u
,.",.~~"....m'~"'_""'_~~~'~__~~~_'~_~"_'_""~_~_""""'",.,.-.,--..---.---
-4-
2. Another option would be to maintain the existing staff in the
Mayor/Council Offices and then assign a currently employed Management ~
Assistant elsewhere in the City to each Councilmember to provide support
to them in terms of constituent relations and research for policy and
issues. Currently, the City has Management Assistants in Administration
(3), and one each in Police, Public Works, and Parks & Recreation. Each
person would continue to do their current job, but four of this number
would be a direct contact person for each Counci lmember ,in addition to
these regular duties, to provide staff support as needed. This would
obviously have to be coordinated through a Deputy City Manager to provide
continuity and coordination. The advantage of this alternative is that
there would be no increase in payroll and each Councilmember would have an
individual staff person to assist them on a part-time basis on constituent
relations and policy development.
The disadvantages to this option are that the individual staff people are
: spread throughout the Civic Center complex, may not be immediately
accessible to the Councilmember, and it may hurt their current work
effort. If this option is pursued, it probably should be pursued on a
trial basis to determine if the disadvantages just cited would really be
. problems. It may be that each of those disadvantages could be mitigated
- depending on the individual involved and the needs of the individual
Councilmember.
3. Another option would be to add a second full-time professional staff
position to provide support to the City Council. It appears that the
basic duties of support staff for most Councils in other cities involves
constituent relations, including response to complaints, phone calls, ~.
preparation of letters, resolutions and proclamations; assisting with
special community events; performing research; and assisting a
Councilmember in developing policy initiatives. This would basically
parallel the support structure provided by the City of Santa Ana where one
staff person is responsible for constituent relations and the second staff
person is responsible for research and policy development. The advantage
of this proposal is that it not only would increase the amount of Council
support and alleviate Council workload, but would also provide a better
focus on the basic functions of Council support staff than is. currently
, the case and probably would provide a better division of responsibility
. between constituent relations and policy development functions. It
probably would provide for better coordination of responses to constituent
letters and would be less expensive than the next alternative.
. The disadvantage, however, is that it is more expensive than the first two
alternatives and each Councilmember would not have their own person to
support their work as a Councilmember, and therefore may not meet
Councilmembers' individual needs for support.
.-.,
)1A.-IZ
~~-~
-5-
4. The next option would be to add the equivalent of two more full time staff
to support the Council work effort. This could be in the form of a
half-time person to support each member of the Council (the Senior
Management Assistant would still support the Mayor), or there could be two
.. full time positions that would support the remaining four members of the
Council. The advantage to this option is that each Councilmember could
have their own person to help support their work effort and to be able to
individualize the response to constituent relations and policy development
initiatives compared to the current level of support.
The disadvantages are that this option would be more costly than the other
options (at least Options II and 2) and, depending upon the level and
number of staff and the overall guidelines provided such staff, there
could be, as has been the experience of other cities, some coordination
and communication issues that would need to be resolved.
There are obviously other options such as some combination of the above
options, using the equivalent resources of a Senior Management Assistant
position for presumably five part-time contractual employees, providing a
full-time staff person for each Councilmember or providing a part-time person
to each Councilmember at their option. But regardless of the option
selection, the City Manager stands ready to provide support for Council as
needed, with the real issue being what form should the support take.
JDG:mab
goalset
t. t
\11:\-/3
35~