Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCVRC Min 2006/06/22 CC/RDA MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (CYRe) MEETING JOINTLY WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA June 22, 2006 6:00 PM A Regular Meeting of the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation of the City of Chula Vista meeting jointly with the Redevelopment Agency and the City Council of the City ofChula Vista, was calIed to order at 6: II p.m. in the Council Chambers, located in City HalI, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California. CYRC ROLL CALL Board Members Castaneda, Chavez, Desrochers, Lewis, McCann, Paul, Rindone, Rooney and Chairman PadilIa CITY COUNCILIREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ROLL CALL Council! Agency Members Castaneda, Chavez, McCann, Rindone, and Mayor/Chair PadilIa ALSO PRESENT: Interim Chief Executive Officer Thomson, Chief Financial Officer Kachadorrian, General Counsel Moore, Secretary Smith, Assistant Community Development Director Hix, Redevelopment Manager Crockett PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, MOMENT OF SILENCE CONSENT CALENDAR (Item I) I. APPROV AL OF MINUTES ~ May 25, 2006 Staff Recommendation: That the CVRC approve the minutes of May 25, 2006. ACTION Director Rindone offered Consent Calendar Item I. Director Rooney seconded the motion, and it carried 9-0. PUBLIC COMMENTS Norma Runyon made inquiry regarding plans of the Redevelopment Agency for the present location of the Brentwood Mobilehome Park on Industrial Boulevard. Chair/Mayor Padilla requested staff respond to Ms Runyon ACTION ITEMS Director Castaneda stated that although he is not directly effected by the subject matter, the areas where the revenues would be spent are near his horne, and upon the advice of General Council recused himself and left the Council Chambers at 6: 17 p.m ACTION ITEMS (continued) 2. CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE AND SALE BY THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF TAX ALLOCATION REFUNDING BONDS, IN TWO OR MORE SERIES, IN THE AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF NOT TO EXCEED $28.5 MILLION IN CONNECTION WITH THE BA YFRONT/TOWN CENTRE I REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT The Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation is a recommending body to the Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency on financial matters involving redevelopment funds. The refunding of the 1994 Senior Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds, Series A and D, and the 1994 Subordinate Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds, Series C, based on current projections, would provide an annual debt service savings to the Redevelopment Agency of $500,000, or a total savings of $4.8 million over the remaining 20 years of the bonds (20% of the par amount of the bonds). Chief Financial Officer Kachadoorian provided the staff report. Staff Recommendation: The CVRC adopt the following resolutions (2. a.) and (2. b.) ACTION: Director Desrochers offered Resolution Nos. 2006-026 and 2006-027, headings read, texts waived. a. RESOLUTION NO. 2006-026, RESOLUTION OF THE CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION RECOMMENDING THE ISSUANCE BY THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA OF TAX ALLOCATION REFUNDING BONDS, IN TWO OR MORE SERIES, IN THE AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF NOT TO EXCEED $28,500,000 (BA YFRONT/TOWN CENTRE) b. RESOLUTION NO. 2006-027, RESOLUTION OF THE CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA WAIVE THE CONSULTANT SELECTION PROCESS AND APPROVE A FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH EJ. DE LA ROSA & CO. AS UNDERWRITERS FOR THE REFUNDING OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 1994 SUBORDINATE TAX ALLOCATION REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES C AND 1994 SENIOR TAX ALLOCATION REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES D; WAIVE THE CONSULTANT SELECTION PROCESS AND APPROVE THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH HARRELL & COMPANY ADVISORS, LLC TO SERVE AS FINANCIAL ADVISORS Vice Chairman McCann seconded the motion, and it carried 7-0-1 with Director Castaneda abstaining and Director Chavez away from the dais. The City Council adopt resolution (2.c) Page 2 - CVRC/RDAlCC Minutes http://www.chulavistaca.gov June 22, 2006 .. ~--- ACTION ITEMS (continued) ACTION. Mayor/Chairman Padilla otfllr~,Rliwlution No. 2006-200, RDA Resolution No. 2006-1945, and Joint Resolution No. 2006-201/RDA Resolution No. 1946, headings read, texts waived: c. RESOLUTION NO. 2006-200, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE ISSUANCE BY THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA OF TAX ALLOCATION REFUNDING BONDS, IN TWO OR MORE SERIES, IN THE AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF NOT TO EXCEED $28,500,000 (BAYFRONT/TOWN CENTRE) The Redevelopment Agency adopt resolution (2.d) d. RDA RESOLUTION NO. 2006-1945, RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF TAX ALLOCATION REFUNDING BONDS, IN TWO OR MORE SERIES, IN THE AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF NOT TO EXCEED $28,500,000 IN CONNECTION WITH THE BA YFRONT/TOWN CENTRE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT, AND APPROVING RELATED DOCUMENTS AND ACTIONS The City Council and Redevelopment Agency adopt resolution (2.e) e. COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006-201, AND RDA RESOLUTION NO. 2006-1946, JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA WAIVING THE CONSULTANT SELECTION PROCESS AND APPROVING A FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH E.J. DE LA ROSA & CO AS UNDERWRITERS FOR THE REFUNDING OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 1994 SUBORDINATE TAX ALLOCATION REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES C AND 1994 SENIOR TAX ALLOCATION REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES D; WAIVING THE CONSULTANT SELECTION PROCESS AND APPROVING THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH HARRELL & COMPANY ADVISORS, LLC TO SERVE AS FINANCIAL ADVISORS; AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE AMENDMENTS TO THE AGREEMENTS The motion carried 4-0-1 with Council! Agency member Castaneda abstaining. Page 3 - CVRC/RDAlCC Minutes http.//www.chulavistaca.gov June 22, 2006 ACTION ITEMS (continued) At 6:22 p.m. Director/Agency/Councilmember Castaneda returned to the Council Chambers. Chairman Padilla stated that staff had requested Item 3 be continued to the next meeting. ACTION: Vice-Chairman McCann moved continuance of Item 3 to the next meeting of the CVRC on July 13, 2006. Director/Agency member Castaneda seconded the motion, and it carried 9-0. 3. CONSIDERATION OF EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATING AGREEMENT AND FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR AN AFFORDABLE RENTAL HOUSING DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE MERGED REDEVELOPMENT AREA Wakeland Housing and Development Corporation is interested in developing an affordable, family rental project on the former Tower Lodge Motel site located at 1151 Broadway. Currently vacant, the former Tower Lodge Motel represents an opportunity to remove an existing blighted property and the provision of new housing opportunities for predominately very low-income households. In order to determine the feasibility of this project, staff is proposing financial assistance in the form of a predevelopment loan. The Agency is requested to consider a Predevelopment Loan Agreement for $200,000. Staff Recommendation: The CVRC adopt the following resolutions (3. a.) and (3. b.): a. RESOLUTION OF THE CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION APPROVING AN EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND WAKELAND HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION REGARDING THE POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF A REAL ESTATE PROJECT LOCATED AT 1501 BROADWAY IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA b. RESOLUTION OF THE CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION RECOMMENDING [A] APPROVAL OF A PREDEVELOPMENT LOAN AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND WAKELAND HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN AFFORDABLE RENTAL HOUSING DEVELOPMENT TO BE LOCATED AT 1501 BROADWAY IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT; AND [B] APPROPRIATION OF $200,000 FROM THE UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE IN THE LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING FUND FOR SAID PREDEVELOPMENT LOAN TO WAKELAND HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION Page 4 - CVRC/RDA/CC Minutes http://www.chulavistaca.gov June 22, 2006 ACTION ITEMS (continued) The Redevelopment Agency adopt F6solm;(}ff,(3.c.): c RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING [A] A PREDEVELOPMENT LOAN AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND WAKELAND HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATION OF AN AFFORDABLE RENTAL HOUSING DEVELOPMENT TO BE LOCATED AT 1501 BROADWAY IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT; AND [B] APPROPRIATION OF $200,000 FROM THE UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE IN THE LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING FUND FOR THE PREDEVELOPMENT LOAN TO WAKELAND HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION Chairman Padilla inquired as to whether Items 4 and 5 could be consolidated for discussion. Assistant Community Development Director Hix responded in the affirmative, and the Board concurred to consolidate the items. 4. CONSIDERATION OF THE PROCEDURAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION PROJECT/APPLICATION REVIEW PROCESS Second phase of a three-part discussion to propose a rramework of step-by-step procedures for the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation's review and consideration of development projects and applications, including when the CVRC and public should be involved in the process. Phase 1- Review of the Roles and Responsibilities of the CYRC was discussed March 9, 2006. Staff Recommendation: Ihat the CVRC adopt the following resolution: RESOLUTION NO 2006-028, RESOLUTION OF THE CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION APPROVING A PROCEDURAL FRAMEWORK FOR CYRC REVIEW AND CONSIDERA nON OF DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS AND APPLICATIONS 5 CONSIDERATION OF CYRC PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS Final phase of a three-part discussion to adopt a public participation process for the CYRC Staff Recommendation: 1hat the CVRC adopt one of the following resolutions (5.a.) or (5. h.): Page 5 - CYRC/RDNCC Minutes http://www.chulavistaca.gov June 22, 2006 ACTION ITEMS (continued) a. RESOLUTION NO. 2006-029, RESOLUTION OF THE CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ADOPTING A PUBLIC PARTICIPATION POLICY ESTABLISHING A COMMUNITY-WIDE REDEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO GATHER PUBLIC INPUT AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS AND APPLICATIONS -or- b. RESOLUTION OF THE CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ADOPTING A PUBLIC PARTICIPATION POLICY ESTABLISHING THE CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AS THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION VEHICLE TO GATHER PUBLIC INPUT ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS AND APPLICATIONS Assistant Community Development Director Hix provided an overview of the staff report noting that on March 9th, the Board heard the staff report on the roles and responsibilities of the CVRC. The presentation on Items 4 and 5 will continue to build on the prior discussion, and staff will be presenting the last two segments on how the CVRC will operate. The discussion on Item 4 will cover the procedural framework for CVRC project review, including several concepts, such as the early involvement by the Board in project design and review, as well as when public review should occur in the design process. The discussion on Item 5 will cover the public participation process and how public participation will occur. Redevelopment Manager Crockett provided the staff report on Item 4, the proposed procedural framework for project review as outlined in the process flowchart, and responded to questions of the Board. Mr. Crockett clarified what an application consisted of, the limiting of upfront investment for developers prior to public input being received, the role of the Urban Core Specific Plan in the process, how enviromnental issues will be handled including California Enviromnental Quality Act (CEQA) review, and how the CVRC has taken the role and responsibility of the Resource Conservation Commission. Assistant Community Development Director Hix provided an overview of the staff report on Item 5, noting that the City Council and Redevelopment Agency adopted 3 principles of public participation in May of 2005, being: early and often; open, inclusive, and accessible; and educational and informative. The reports being discussed, were released early allowing for input to be received from additional groups such as the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement (ENA) developers, members of the community including Crossroads II, and the Northwest Civic Association, as well as individuals and staff. Several stakeholder letters, proposals, and meeting notes were received and copies had been provided to the Board. The proposals being reviewed evolved from the original report and were updated to include input received over the last several weeks. Page 6 - CVRC/RDAlCC Minutes http://www.chuIavistaca.gov June 22, 2006 - - - --- ._-_..._-~- ACTION ITEMS (continued) The alternatives for the public process are. to. l!se., the, eVRC as it exists, or the formation of a Redevelopment Agency Advisory Cornmiuee.orRAC. The public participation rramework, regardless of the alternative selected, that needs to be implemented includes early public input and participation on project design, holding meetings in the affected community area whenever appropriate and possible, and effective public noticing through e-mail, advertising, website usage, and streaming video. Advantages and disadvantages of each alternative were then discussed. In discussing these concepts with developers, they were clear that they wanted a public process that was clear, inclusive and constructive, they wanted community input as they wanted the community to support their projects, they were willing to work with the public to address their concerns, and they wanted certainty that the process would move them forward in a predictable way without endless loops of input and redesign. Additionally, they felt that members of a RAC should have some level of expertise, or a strong interest and ability to understand design and development concepts. Community group representatives provided different perspectives and interests, as did staff and others who participated in the discussion. Some of the things staff heard was the need to have existing community organizations represented on the RAC, while others felt that geographically based representation was needed; the community organizations should be resident based in Chula Vista and geographically focused on Chula Vista; the RAC should elect their own Chair and Vice- Chair; the CVRC should allocate positions, but not appoint people; people should be appointed by their groups to fill the seats designated on the RAC; a majority or 2/3 of the RAC should be able to remove a member for inappropriate behavior or cause as would the CYRC/CC/RDA; design professionals from City commissions should meet certain technical qualifications, but this would not be a requirement of the community or business members; consist of a off number of 9-15 with potentially alternates who could discuss but not vote, and lastly, the RAC should include an equal number of design professionals, business representatives and community groups. Common themes were then presented that included: individuals should represent a group that has an interest in redevelopment; the RAC should be split between technical, community, and business organizations, RAC members should be qualified in some way, the process should be clear and predictable, community organizations should be resident based and/or geographically focused on Chula Vista, and the RAC should consist of an odd number of members ranging from 9 to 15. Staff then provided the areas that require direction from the CYRC which were: the categories (technical, community, business), number of representatives per category, qualification of members, and the selection/appointment/election process for members. Staff recommended the categories include technical, business and community organizations, with 3-5 members per category for a total of 9-15 members, and possibly alternates. Potential desirable qualifications and representatives for each category were then presented, as was a comparison between geographic areas and existing community organizations. Page 7 - CVRC/RDAlCC Minutes http://www.chulavistaca.gov June 22, 2006 ACTION ITEMS (continued) Consensus was received rrom the groups spoken to for a bottom-up approach, with the CVRC selecting the groups that would make up the committee, and the group/organizations independently electing/appointing their representatives, and the RAC electing its own Chair and Vice Chair. Regarding the terms of office, staff will come back with a proposal for possibly 2-4 year staggered terms, as well as procedures and ground rules for the removal of a member. Assistant Community Development Department Director Hix, then summarized staff's recommendation on Item 4, for the CVRC to adopt the resolution approving the procedural rramework for CVRC review and consideration of development projects and applications; and on Item 5, for the CVRC to adopt a resolution approving the public participation process that establishes either the CVRC as the public participation vehicle or a Redevelopment Advisory Committee. If the Redevelopment Advisory Committee is selected, the Board to provide direction to staff on the RAC's composition, size and selection process, and direct them to bring back draft rules and procedures as the earliest possible time for implementation. Chairman Padilla requested the members note that on the dais, and part of the record, were written communications rrom both the Northwest Civic Association to staff and the Board containing an outline of their recommendations, as well as one rrom Crossroads II. The following people then spoke to the items: Georgette Gomez, representing the Environmental Health Coalition, spoke regarding the need to ensure that the procedural framework does not override the stakeholder committee process, and in support of the community workshop for non-ENA project proposals. Mayor Padilla responded that the project review and public participation processes would not preempt any of the existing Citizen Advisory Committee (CAe) or other public stakeholder processes underway that focus on the planning or draft plans underway. Connie Mihos, homeowner in the Town Center area, stated that the public input appears to be for design only and expressed concerns with the purpose of the facilities that are going in. She further stated that she was a member of Northwest Civic Association and supported their proposal. She then made inquiry as to whether the public input would be allowed for the purpose or use of the ENA or just the design. Redevelopment Manager Crockett responded that the use is allowed through the policy document, such as the Urban Core Specific Plan, and this discussion is a rramework for a projects design. Ms. Mihos then inquired as to whether existing uses of tattoo parlors and a gym were allowable in the new plan. Planning Manager Ladiana responded that the 24 Hour Fitness was allowable under existing zoning and the draft Urban Core Specific Plan, and the tattoo parlor was under existing zoning. Teresa Acerro spoke in support of the Northwest Civic Associations recommendation on the RAC, and the early public forum. She then requested at least a one-week advance notice be given and the documents be digitized and placed on the web or e-mailed to interested parties in advance of the meeting. Chairman Padilla concurred with the exploration of the use of web technology to provide a wider noticing area. Page 8 - CVRC/RDNCC Minutes http://www.chulavistaca.gov June 22, 2006 ACTION ITEMS (continued) Glen Googins, Board Member of the Third Avenue Village Association (T A V A), on behalf of his Board, applauded the CYRC for their efforts to date, to devise a meaningful way for the community to provide input into the CYRe's project development process. Mr. Googins stated that T A V A had not taken a formal position or provided a competing proposal, however, they felt they deserved serious consideration in the community review process, and suggested the possibility of T A V A serving as the community and design review body for projects within their jurisdiction. Another possible role T A V A is interested in would be membership within a body with a larger geographical jurisdiction along the lines of one of staff's proposaL Director Rindone inquired and Mr. Blakely responded that the 13-member T A V A Board was fairly equally split with 50 percent business owners and 50 percent tenants. Mr. Pembeaton spoke in support of the Crossroads proposal but expressed concerns for his perception that there was no room for tweaking of the proposed plan, and that renters did not appear to be represented nor did service people. Pamela Bensoussan, representing the Northwest Civic Association Steering Committee (NWCA), addressed points in the letter submitted by the NWCA (copy on file), several of which were reflected in the staff report. Additionally, she stressed the importance of having a Resource Conservation Commission representative, two Design Review Commission members and at least one Planning Commission member on the RAC; three "business" individuals induding one from T A V A one ITom the Main Street Business Association, and one from the Chamber of Commerce; several residents who are elected by and represent various community groups such as one member chosen by the Golden State Mobile Home Association to represent mobile home park residents; two resident members selected by the Northwest Civic Association; two resident members selected by Crossroads and one member ITom Crossroads to represent that organization. Ms. Bensoussan then stated that the NWCA Steering committee had additional recommendations that developers should first get feedback ITom the community, via the RAC, prior to being granted ENA status ITom the CYRC; the RAC should hold a developers workshop platform to present their projects to the public early to gather community feedback and then once their project is well defined, the RAC should conduct a public hearing to make formal advisory recommendation to the CVRC; the RAC should receive regular notice of all project applications over 5,000 square feet or $10,000; the T A V A Design Committee should be informed early about all projects in the Third Avenue Village District, regardless of size, and the RAC should function much like the other Chula Vista advisory commissions, with City support staff, public noticing of meeting agendas etc. Pat Aguilar, representing Crossroads II, spoke to Item 4, the process flow chart, and expressed the importance holding the first public forum at the pre-design/idea/concept phase for developers where they would present their massing concept. She then spoke in support of staff's recommendation on the establishment of an advisory committee and addressed points in the proposal submitted by her organization (copy on file). The proposal included equal representation between homeowners and the business community and was comprised of 13 members made up of 4 homeowners (must live in home), 2 ITom the northwest, 2 ITom the Page 9 - CYRC/RDNCC Minutes http://www chulavistaca.gov June 22, 2006 ACTION ITEMS (continued) Southwest; 4 business owners, I representing T A V A, I representing the Chamber of Commerce, I representing the Main Street Business Association and I rrom the Added Redevelopment Areas; as well as I Planning Commissioner, I Resource Conservation Commissioner with an interest in historic preservation, I member of the Design Review Committee, I member of Crossroads II and I resident of a Chula Vista mobile home park. Further, Ms. Aguilar stated her organization felt the process should be bottom-up with people being appointed by existing community organizations, and the meetings should be held in the community. On the subject of design review, although it is inter-related with public participation, RAC members should not be required to meet any specific technical requirements, rather a separate design review committee, independent of the RAC, appointed by the CVRC, should be created to judge whether projects presented are consistent with design guidelines, to advise the CVRC when it is appropriate to grant exceptions to the design guidelines, and thirdly, to adjudicate disputes on design guidelines. Lastly, they supported the recommendation rrom T A V A in their request to review anything on Third Avenue between E and G Street should be presented to their Design Review Board in addition to the RAC. Tony LoPresti representing the Environmental Health Coalition stated his organization felt a vote on Item 5 would be premature in that inclusive community prospective is not legitimately provided for. He noted there are 5 different project areas with very distinct characteristics being lumped together, and the close to home experience that is an indispensable part of a community review board is not guaranteed. Additionally, the structure does not bring together residents and other community players who can focus more specific attention on each redevelopment area. The RAC proposal, as presented, does not adequately ensure true community representation, more geographic coverage, as well as an election process, are minimally necessary. To exclude tenants in Western Chula Vista is not acceptable. Mr. LoPresti requested the CVRC continue the item until a proposal is brought forth to better represent the actual communities to be impacted and provide time for community organizations to address other issues. The proposals need to improve on the specifics of the noticing procedure to provide for who will receive notices, when they will receive notice and the language they will receive notice in. Also, a description of the feedback loop needs to be put in place. Lastly, the public participation process to decide the public participation process needs improvement, as the NWCA, Crossroads II, and the Chamber of Commerce, are not sufficiently representative of the greater community. In closing, Mr. LoPresti stated his organization would be submitting a letter within the next week addressing their concerns, and again, requested a continuation of the item. Sharon Floyd stated she supported the recommendation to continue this item as presented by Mr. LoPresti, citing the need for additional time and community input. Additionally, she expressed her view that although the NWCA proposal was great, but she would prefer to see one representative rrom each group, and a broader base. Tina Zenzola, Executive Director of Walk San Diego, acknowledged staff for their work, and expressed her confusion in part due to the meeting changes, and her view that additional input rrom residents in southwest Chula Vista was needed. Ms. Zenzola then expressed concerns with noticing, the need for translation of meetings, holding of meetings in the community, the need to explore different meeting formats - less formal. Additionally, regarding the requirement for technical RAC membership, she suggested looking at the overlap between public health and land use and decisions, and suggested consideration of the addition of people who have the overlap of experience such as knowledge about walk able, livable communities, and would be submitting a letter summarizing these concerns and suggestions. Page 10- CVRC/RDNCC Minutes http://www.chulavistaca.gov June 22, 2006 ~ .----! ACTION ITEMS (continued) John Sherritt, President of Ainslie Commlmities"spoke in support of the formalization of the public participation process. David Krogh expressed support of the 3 part structure; keeping the membership small - going with 3 representatives in each area with alternates; and the self-appointment process, but not as a life tenure. He then encouraged the CYRC to make the groups work together to decide who would represent them, and concurred with the need for representation /Tom the Planning Commission, the Design Review Commission, and the Resource Conservation Commission. Director Rindone provided an overview of the alternate concept, which insures organizations and community groups that they will always have representation. Tanya Rovira-Osterwalder, Project Coordinator for Healthy Eating Active Communities (HEAC), resident of Chula Vista and former resident of southwest Chula Vista, stated that translation of the materials and different methods for community outreach are necessary for successful participation. Chairman Padilla thanked everyone for their testimony, participation and patience on Items 4 and 5. He then stated although he respected and appreciated the testimony /Tom EHC, HEAC, and others, he felt it was time to stop talking and move forward, as the dialogue has gone on for nearly two years and a structure needed to be put in place that serves everyone. He spoke in support of the establishment of a RAC and the need for the community focus to be the centerpiece, not the technical side. He expressed support for the proposals put forth by the NWCA and Crossroads II, with minor modifications. He stated the need for the RAC to be self- governing, meaning whatever structure the CYRC comes up with, those organizations should vote and elect their own delegate, and appoint them to the RAC to represent the viewpoints of these organizations or interests and if they are not doing that, the organization should have the authority to remove them. Given the fact that the streamlining of the process needs to be balanced, representatives from the Planning Commission, Resource Conservation Commission and Design Review Commission should have a place in the RAC, along with the standing, deep- seated organizations that represent the business community such as T A V A for downtown Third Avenue and the Chamber of Commerce for city-wide. He proposed a modification for the southwest, to look to EHC or HEAC to serve in the capacity of representing them, to broaden the involvement of the organizations, to bring them in and establish representation there. Chairman Padilla expressed the need to avoid the turf wars, agreed that the early meeting should be an idea meeting, and regarding the points made regarding cultural and language barriers need to be looked at and include the use of technology to give people access to information. Vice Chairman McCann thanked all present for their participation, and spoke in support of the establishment of a RAC; regarding geographic vs groups he proposed a hybrid; expressed the need for representation in the southwest; the need to make sure that there is room for at least one at large member, and the need for alternates. Page I I - CVRC/RDA/CC Minutes http://www.chulavistaca.gov June 22, 2006 ACTION ITEMS (continued) Director Castaneda stated the Board viewed active participation as an enhancement to the process and that it was very important to have meaningful participation from the people affected most by the developments, those who live in and around the redevelopment areas. He stated that the RAC should be viewed as an insurance policy by investors and developers, as the submittal will start with the idea phase and dialogue with the community. Additionally, he stated that residents needed to be included in the process whether they rented or owned, a mobile home park resident needs to be included and should be one located in or near a redevelopment area, and lastly, he concurred with Chairman Padilla, that it was time to move forward. Director Desrochers concurred with his colleagues' comments and stated that he felt since those most effected were the residents, and would therefore like to have more residents involved. He suggested II but no more than 13 members be considered, for example, 3 homeowners, 2 residential tenants, 1 T A V A representative, 1 Chamber of Commerce representative, 2 business property owner representatives and 2 business tenants. Additionally, he stated he supported alternates, and did not see a need for the technical people on the committee. Director Chavez spoke regarding noticing and suggested going out into the community with a teaser to get them interested, such as putting up photo boards of what the vision is, followed up with discussion. Additionally, she expressed concerns with members of the community being underrepresented, such as renters and people in need of affordable housing. She stated that there were organizations in the southwest such as NCI, HEAC, Chula Vista Collaborative and others. Ms. Chavez then expressed support for Director Desrochers suggestions, as well as the need for inclusion of a mobile home park representative. Director Lewis addressed his involvement with the Citizens Action Committee working on the Bayfront project, and the need for the composition of the RAC to take into consideration the varying points of view and interest and remove the emotions. Tbe process cannot be overburdened to the point that a developer will pack up and leave. A concern is the coordination between the RAC and the CVRC and how it is brought together to move forward in a timely, economical manner. Vice Chairman McCann left the Council Chambers at 8:18 p.m. and did not return. Director Rooney agreed that it was time to move forward, and the establishment of the public participation process is a great first step. He expressed the importance to have a diverse group from the community as well as technical peoples such as representatives from the Planning Commission, Design Review Commission and Resource Conservation Commission. Regarding geographic vs. organizations, organizations made more sense to him and he suggested a hybrid selection system where the civic organizations submit a representative they would like to be considered and the CVRC would select from that group. He agreed with the RAC approach as it widens the opportunity for public involvement, the initial meeting should be early on and held as a preliminary meeting without a lot of presentation materials, and suggested the submittal requirements be specified to assist developers. Further, Director Rooney concurred with the need for alternates and the process for feedback with a reporting system that provides a written understanding of their decision and any recommendations, tenants should be included, a well defined noticing procedure and feedback loop be established and a reporting process. Page 12 - CVRC/RDAlCC Minutes http://www.chulavistaca.gov June 22, 2006 ACTION ITEMS (continued) Director Rindone stated there appeared to,be co~s on the forming of a RAC, and provided a brief overview of how the idea of the creation of a CYRC began. He then added that there were 3 very unique, major concepts involved in the forming of the CYRC, starting with having the Council as part of the process on the rront end, as they are elected at large and are responsible to the entire community; having professionals on board as part of the voting membership; and the streamlining process. He stated that the technical members and staff provide the technical expertise needed, as do a lot of the community members; disagreed with the need for individual members as he felt the community organizations added an additional benefit; and encouraged renters and mobile home park residents to get involved with one of the current business and community organizations. Director Paul spoke in support of the establishment of a RAC and confirmed the ability to revisit the composition in the future. ACTION: Chairman Padilla offered the resolution agendized as 5.a., to adopt a public participation policy establishing a community-wide redevelopment advisory committee to gather public input and make recommendations, with additional direction based on the testimony and discussion tonight. Staff to come back with a specific structure of recommendations for a RAC with a membership of between 9 and no more than 13 members, and recommendations on a potential alternate structure either by organization or member -to-member that would consider the following: the representation from a group and geographic standpoint of all the keynote business groups to include Chamber, to include T A V A, the key impacted community groups to include Crossroads, to include Northwest Civic Association, to include perhaps HEAC and EHe. That the structure staff recommends specifically provide a blended balance between individuals who are resident owners and resident tenants, who are tenant business owners and owner operators, geographic balance, and to include all the aforementioned organizations. That the structure staff comes back with in the recommendation is self-governing, that each group appoints its own delegate and have the power to remove that delegate, and to bring back some specificity. That would be the general guidelines that he would suggest - staff to bring back the specifics - seats 1 thru 9, 1 thru 13 here is how they are broken down. His personal recommendation would be that staff look at the Northwest Civic Association's recommendations. He believes their recommendation has essentially the same outline Because he pointed out, as did Mr. Rindone, that when you are talking about having somebody rrom mobilehome parks, somebody from T A V A somebody from Crossroads, somebody rrom Northwest, those people can all be business owners, and/or tenants, they can be property owners and renters and so within those designations you can also meet that other balancing criteria so they are not mutually exclusive, it doesn't mean you have to extend the number of people to 25 So within that structure, if you look at their outline, it is well thought out. The only modification he would personally suggest was that, with respect to representation rrom the Page 13 - CVRC/RDA/CC Minutes http://www.chulavistaca.gov June 22, 2006 ACTION ITEMS (continued) southwest area, which is going to include a lot of expanded redevelopment areas before there is a civic association for southwest in existence, maybe consider instead of having Crossroads have their two other reps or one other rep also represent southwest, that HEAC or EHC be brought in and have them serve in the interim in that capacity as a nominating authority. He stated that would be his only other thought, and that staff has been given a general framework here as to the details that have pretty much been provided based on what has been submitted in writing and also in all of the testimony. Stating again, a group of between 9 and 13 with alternates, self appointing that blends all these criteria between background, residency, ownership, as a renter, and whether they have been represented by all of these organization and of course to include a delegate from each of the primary City Boards and Commissions - that would be Planning, RCC, and Design Review. In conclusion, he stated staff should modify Northwest and would be pretty much 99% there, as long as they balanced the other considerations. Director Rindone stated he would also add to that general direction, such things as there will an annual meeting for the selection whether it's the Planning Commission, Northwest Civic Association or HEAC every year on a certain date there would an annual selection of the delegate and alternate. Some the organizations initial delegate would be for 2 years the others for 4 years so they are alternating creating an opportunity for new people, but not changing all the time. Also, through e-mails, dialogue or phone calls, as this is being restructured, and encourage additional input be looked at during the next meeting. Chairman Padilla added that he would also direct staff to put together a model based on the input received here, and as far as the different organizations, Chamber, T A Y A, Crossroads, NW, EHC, HEAC, contact a representative from each of those groups once staff has a detailed model, and dialogue with them prior to bringing it back so that we maximize the potential that we have a broad consensus from the community coming forward together in agreement on a proposed process that reflects everybody's pretty consistent testimony, and the comments from the Board. Director Rindone seconded the motion. Chairman Padilla then noted that Director Castaneda had reminded him of the resolution on Item 4, and Chairman Padilla amended his motion and offered the Resolution for Item 4, and the Resolution for Item 5.a. headings read, texts waived. Director Rindone accepted the amended motion. Director Chavez noted that there was a large list of community organizations and community members and that staff probably had their addresses and the leaders or presidents addresses, suggesting that was a start in making sure that they get the information in advance so they can notify all of their members. Page 14 - CYRC/RDAlCC Minutes http://www.chulavistaca.gov June 22, 2006 _.~--'"_.__.__. ACTION ITEMS (continued) Director Lewis spoke regarding the procoouralftamework in Item 4, referring to the Northwest Civic Associations comment regarding the placement of the ENA in the process, and inquired as to whether that should be addressed at this time or later. Chairman Padilla offered that it would be addressed in detail when the suggested framework is brought back. The amended motion carried 8-0-1 with Vice Chairman McCann absent. Director Rindone requested consensus that the goal was to bring this structure back on the July 13th meeting. Assistant Community Development Department Director Hix expressed concern with committing to that date and being able to get the draft out to the affected community groups. If staff is unable to bring it back at the July 13th meeting, it will be brought back the first meeting in August. 6. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S REPORTS a. Status of the Recruitment Process for the CYRC Chief Executive Officer Interim Chief Executive Officer Thomson reported that the executive search firm that was retained to help with the selection process for the CYRC Chief Executive Officer, is completing the initial review of the candidates, and at this point it is planned to bring information back to the Board at the meeting of July 13th, for review of the candidates and their background and to decide on the process for moving forward Redevelopment Manager Crockett made inquiry as to whether the Board wanted staff to start scheduling the non-ENA projects that are being processed and are located throughout the redevelopment project area. Consensus of the Board was that unless there was an emergency, the first order of good faith with the community was to adopt and follow the public participation process. 7. CHAIRMAN'S REPORTS There were none. 8 DIRECTORS' COMMENTS Director Desrochers inquired and Redevelopment Manager Crockett responded that the 24 Hour Fitness representatives, along with Community Development staff and the Planning Manager, attended a Joint T A V A design board as well as full board of directors meeting, where they passed a resolution requesting a re-design of the project. Immediately following that, the parties attended a Joint meeting of Crossroads II and Northwest Civic Association, where again, they adopted primarily, the same resolution as adopted by the T A V A board. The applicant has agreed to do a re-design and is working with those organizations to fetter out the details and it is planned to come back to the CYRC at the July 13th meeting. Page 15 - CYRC/RDA/CC Minutes http://www.chulavistaca.gov June 22, 2006 DIRECTORS' COMMENTS (continued) Director Desrochers then inquired as to what had happened at the Tuesday night Council meeting with regards to the CVRC board stipend, which he felt should have been brought up at the corporation level as the action taken gave the appearance that the Independent Directors were not part of the group as they were not included in the discussion. Chairman Padilla recognized General Counsel Moore to explain the legal side, and the terms of flexibility that was built into the resolution. He added that the action taken by the Council provided for staff to come back at some future point if the Elected Directors decided to compensate the Independent Directors but not themselves. General Counsel Moore stated that the resolution is in accordance with the Bylaws right now, where the City Council has the ability to set the stipends. The stipends on Tuesday night have been amended to be set at $0 for now, effective in August, providing notice to everyone, including the CVRC members. There is a flexibility in that there was a direction to staff to come back with a report to look at making a tiered system, so that there would be compensation possibly for the CVRC Independent Directors or to eliminate the stipends all together, so there is definitely time and room in the process for discussion. ADJOURNMENT At 9:05 p.m., ChairmanJMayor Padilla, adjourned the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation to its next regularly scheduled meeting on July 13, 2006, at 6:00 p.m., the City Council to its next regularly scheduled meeting on July II, 2006, at 6:00 p.m., and the Redevelopment Agency to its next regularly scheduled meeting on July 18,2006, at 6:00 p.m. ~Uf.#- Dana M. Smith, S cretary Page 16 - CVRC/RDNCC Minutes http://www.chulavistaca.gov June 22, 2006