HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1985/01/03 MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
Thursday, January 3, 1985 8:07 p.m. Council Chamber
(Following Redevelopment Agency meeting) Public Services Building
ROLL CALL
Councilmembers present: Mayor Cox, Councilmembers Malcolm,
McCandliss, Scott, Moore
Councilmembers absent: None
Staff present: Acting City Manager Asmus, City Attorney
Harron
1. RESOLUTION llBgl ACCEPTING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS HIDDEN VISTA
SUBDIVISION (Director of Public Works/City
Engineer)
McMillin Development Inc., has completed the development of public
improvements in this subdivision from lots 1 to 295 and are requesting
acceptance of the improvements. McMillin has posted all subsequent bonds and
completed all the requirements for the improvements. A final inspection was
made on December 18 and the work was found to be completed in accordance with
the improvement agreement and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Staff
recommended acceptance of the public improvements.
RESOLUTION OFFERED BY COUNCILWOMAN McCANDLISS, the reading of the text was
waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved unanimously.
2. ORDINANCE 2097 ADMENDING SECTION lO.62.010B OF THE CHULA VISTA
MUNICIPAL CODE A~4ENDING THE BAIL FOR PARKING
COMPLAINTS - FIRST READING (City Attorney)
The proposed ordinance would increase the amount of bail required for parking
violations from $22 to $30 and would show the increase for parking in
handicapped areas required by State law as $50 with a $3 administrative fee
for the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV).
Mayor Cox noted a revised ordinance has been submitted to the Council.
MSUC {Moore/Cox) to place the ordinance, as revised, on first reading. The
reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved
unanimously.
Adjourned City Council Meeting - 2 - January 3, 1985
3. ORDINANCE 2098 AMENDING CHAPTER 2.60 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING
TO LOST AND STOLEN PROPERTY - FIRST READING (City
Attorney}
The Civil Code provides that the City may acquire unclaimed property pursuant
to 1 ocal ordinance upon compl iance with the hol di ng period and notice
provisions of the Code. Chula Vista's current ordinance does not provide such
an alternative. Therefore, this amendment provides authority within the Chula
Vista Municipal Code for the acquisition of unclaimed property by the City.
MSUC (McCandliss/Malcolm) to place the ordinance on first reading, the reading
of the text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved unanimously.
MSUC (Cox/Moore) to reconsider Item No. 1 - Resolution 11891.
Mayor Cox stated he has a potential conflict of interest on this item and will
abstain.
RESOLUTION OFFERED BY COUNCILWOMAN McCANDLISS, the reading of the text was
waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved with Mayor Cox abstaining.
4. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
a. Acting City Manager Asmus referred to the staff's direction for a report
on the grandfathering of annexations. He stated due to the holidays, this
report has not been prepared.
MSUC (Scott/Malcolm) to file this request.
b. Acting City Manager Asmus noted that several applications have been
received with the Design Review Committee and the Planning Director has
requested Council to make the appointments as soon as possible.
c. Acting City Manager Asmus referred to a written communication (on the next
City Council agenda) indicating the need for an appointment to the LAFCO
Citizen Advisory Committee - this person need not be an elected official.
MSUC (Cox/Moore) to refer this item to the City Manager and come back with the
name of an appropriate staff member plus two alternates.
5. MAYOR'S REPORT
a. MSUC {Cox/Scott) to schedule a Council tour for Saturday, February 2,
1985. (Mayor Cox stated he would like to see included on this tour, the
Golf Course, the Bonita Optimist Club and the potential locations for the
freeway signs).
b. Mayor Cox noted he has now received 15 applications for the vacancy on the
Board of Ethics and asked Council when they would like to meet for the
i ntervi ews.
! IF
Adjourned City Council Meeting 3o January 3, 198B
MSUC (Cox/Scott) to have the Council review the names on the applications and
each member come up with five nominees.
Mayor Cox stated he would have the Council secretary call the people to verify
whether or not they are still interested in serving and then to circulate the
list through the City Council.
c. Mayor Cox announced that Senator Deddeh was successful in getting a bill
through the legislature designating six Superior Court Judges for the San
Diego County area - at least to the South Bay Regional Center. The Board
of Supervisors stated they should determine where those judges should be
assigned. Mayor Cox stated it was the intent of the legislation to
guarantee there would be a reallocation of Superior Court Judges.
MS (Cox/McCandliss) to direct staff to do whatever needs to be done in order
to contact the Board of Supervisors and the Superior Court Presiding Judge and
let them know of the City Council's interest and desires to make sure at least
one Superior Court Judge is assigned to the South County Regional Center.
Under discussion of the motion, Acting City Manager Asmus commented he does
not feel it would be appropriate for staff to contact the Superior Court
Judge. Councilman Malcolm suggested the City Attorney contact the E1 Cajon
City Attorney and work with him on the reallocation of one of these Superior
Court Judges.
In answer to Councilwoman McCandliss' query, City Attorney Hatton stated his
position would be in support of the State law which forces the County to
appoint someone for the South County Regional Center.
MOTION RESTATED
MSUC (Cox/Scott) for staff to write a letter which will go out over the
Mayor's signature communicating to the Board of Supervisors and the Presiding
Judge of the Superior Court this City has strong interest in insuring it will
have a Superior Court Judge assigned to the South County Regional Center.
Further, for staff to research the information contained in the newspaper
articles and come back to the City Council with various options as to further
action to be pursued if there are potential problems in having a Superior
Court Judge assigned to this area.
d. Mayor Cox noted the League of California Cities is sponsoring a seminar on
January 18 and lg at the Quail's Inn in San Marcos. If any Councilmen
wish to attend, they should notify the Council secretary.
6. COUNCIL COMMENTS
a. Councilman Moore discussed the sewer agreement with the City of San Diego
in tying into sewers at Otay Valley Road. There was nothing in the
agreement as to the property owners tying into that line at that time.
Councilman Moore noted that staff has had this plan for the last two weeks
and if it is appropriate, there should be some type of negotiations being
made.
Adjourned City Council Meeting - 4 - January 3, 1985
MSUC (Moore/Scott) staff provide the City Council at the next meeting the pros
and cons of tying into the new sewer line which is being installed beeause of
the City's agreement with San Diego (Otay Valley Read).
b. Councilman Moore questioned the processing and notifications of
annexations once they are approved by the Council and LAFCO. Acting City
Manager Asmus noted the City Clerk notifies a number of agencies. City
Clerk Fulasz stated she submits the total package which includes the
Secretary of State's certification and the recordation date of the
annexation to approximately 47 entities. This includes the fire
department, police department, water companies, etc. - not notified are
the individual property owners i n the areas being annexed.
c. Councilman Malcolm requested a transcript of the following be included in
the minutes:
"We had an interesting couple of pages at the back of our packet from
the State of California FPPC (Fair Political Practices Commission)
regarding conflicts of interests and a question that came up
approximately two years ago regarding Councilman Scott. This opinion
seems to be in line with the original opinion issued by our former
City Attorney and directly opposite of the second opinion after he
researched it (it's unfortunate, I guess, that he researched the
item). During that time of Councilman Scott's problems, there was
not any public statements made by myself, but there were several
statements made to individuals around the City that I regret in
saying - shouldn't have been said. After reading this opinion, it is
clear that there isn't a conflict and I want to make sure that 1985
starts out right. I think i t is necessary for me to acknowledge that
I ewe an apology to Councilman Scott for my statements that were made
a year and a half ago.
ADJOURNMENT at 8:45 p.m. to the meeting of January 8, 1985 at 7 p.m.
City Clerk
WP G: 0576A
PAG
· ! T