Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1989/10/23 Tuesday, October 23, 1989 City Council Conference Room 5:30 p.m. 276 Fourth Avenue Special Meeting 1. ROLL CALL: Present were Councilmembers Gable L, McCandliss, Tim Nader, David L. Malcolm, Leonard M. Moore and Mayor Gregory R. Cox Also Present: Assistant City Manager, Eugene R. Asmus; City Attorney, Thomas J. Harron; Assistant City Attorneys Richard D. Rudolf and Ruth Fritsch; and City Clerk, Beverly A. Authelet. ITEM FOR DISCUSSION 2. DESIGNATION OF SDG&E PROPERTY AS GENERAL INDUSTRIAL - Resolution No. 15354 }~//~' A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista amending Resolution No. 15176 to rescind the General Plan redesignation of the SDG&E power plant site. Assistant City Attorney, Richard Rudol f, informed the Council that he had reviewed the amendment to the Resolution as presented durin9 the regular Council Meeting of October 17, 1989 and had negotiated language to effectuate the concerns of the Council. The amendments do not change the context of the Resolution or the settlement agreement but help clarify intent of agreement and recommended Council approval. He stated that he had received a letter from SDG&E reinstating the proposed agreement with the stipulation that it be acted upon by October 23, 1989. Councilwoman McCandliss questioned the procedure that would follow if the Resolution were approved. Mr. Rudolf stated that the Resolution would be signed and certified and given to SDG&E with the intent being that the approval of the agreement would be their first order of business on Tuesday and that they would file for dismissal with prejudice. MAYOR COX OFFERED RESOLUTION No. 15354, the reading of the text was waived. Councilman Malcolm stated that he would not vote for the Resolution. He did not feel that SDG&E had been hurt financially or had their ability to produce power damaged, and therefore, the reason for the lawsuit was due to the change of designated zoning. He further stated that he felt SDG&E would be filing an application to the State Energy Commission and that the change of zoning was the only item that would hurt them. He expressed concern also over lack of financial penalty in the Resolution and that it was time to take a risk in order to stop expansion of SDG&E facilities. Councilman Nader informed the Council that he would vote yes on the Resolution due to the cost of litigation and the fact that an EIR was in the process for the General Plan which could ultimately correct the zoning situation of SDG&E property. He also felt that if SDG&E did violate the agreement, the City would be back where they are currently and that an EIR would be approved before the courts could litigate the suit. Minutes -2- October 23, 1989 Councilwoman McCandliss stated that the Resolution met the intent and concern of the City Council and that with the moratorium the City is protected. The Resolution states the current position and provides for the settlement of the lawsuit. State and federal agencies should be notified of the status of the property in order to further protect the City. Mayor Cox stated that the ultimate decision regarding expansion for SDG&E would be the State Energy Commission and that he felt the City had done everything possible within the settlement agreement and the Resolution regarding misrepresentation of the zoning. He agreed that state and federal agencies should be contacted regarding the status of the property {rezoning, moratorium, intentions, etc. ). ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: McCandliss, Moore, Nader, Cox NOES: Malcolm MOTION: Moved by Moore, seconded by Mal col m that the appropri ate state agencies be notified, by letter over the Mayor's signature, as to moratorium, concerns, and action of the City Council as it pertains to SDG&E including but not limited to Costal Commission and Public Utilities Commission. Assistant City Attorney Rudolf stated that these agencies had been notified by phone. SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Moved by Nader, seconded by McCandliss to have City Attorney draft a letter to include concerns of City Council and present for review at the Council Workshop to be held on October 26, 1989. Motion passed unanimously. 3. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 6:04 p.m. to 4:00 p.m., in the City Council Conference Room, Thursday, October 26, 1989 to the City Council Workshop. Respectful ly submitted, BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CMC, CITY CLERK by: Deputy City Clerk ~s