Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1983/02/10 MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Thursday, February lO, 1983 Council Conference Room 4:00 p.m. City Hall ROLL CALL Councilmembers present: Mayor Cox, Councilwoman McCandliss, Councilmen Malcolm and Moore Councilman Scott (arrived late) Councilmembers absent: None Staff Present: City Manager Goss, City Attorney Lindberg, Assistant City Manager Asmus 1. REGULATION OF HAZARDOUS WASTE MATERIALS a. RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO RE- CONSIDER THAT PORTION OF THE HAZARgOU9 HASTE 9~DINANCE REGULATIONS RELATIVE TO SERVICE STATIONS AND OTHER GAS AND OIL ORIENTED BUSINESSES AND TO HOLD IMPLEMENTATION THEREOF IN ABEYANCE Councilwoman McCandliss stated that she works for the County of San Diego. In checking with them and the City Attorney,she finds that she has no conflict of interest regarding voting on the hazardous waste materials ordinance. She feels that there are portions of the ordinance that are not fair and she will support only those portions of the ordinance that are in the best interest of the citizens of Chula Vista. City Manager Goss said he has asked Mr. Aker from the County Health Department to be present today and Fire Marshall Ted Mortsell to answer any questions the Council may have. City Attorney Lindberg explained that this is a State law. The County, however, does not have the personnel to enforce it. Therefore, they are requesting that cities adopt the ordinances (surveillance and disclosure) and the fee schedule to allow enforcement. The responsibility of enforcement is with the local Health Officer. The fees would be collected by the County and used for the operation of the program only. Council discussion followed with Mr. Aker, County Health Officer and Fire Marshall Monsell answering the Council's questions pertaining to the following: l) Fire Department inspections vs. those of the Health Department; 2) the types of materials being disposed of; 3) the types of solvents being found in auto repair garages and the Health Department inspection of any material that is toxic or corrosive i.e., inflammable; 4) Fire Department looking into the storage of these materials; 5) the Health Department looking for the disposal of these materials and State regulations which mandate that the materials must be disposed of within 90 days; 6) Health Department's priorities of these inspections of various industries in the City and future workshops so that these_operators would be told of their responsibilities; 7) Council Conference Meeting - 2 - February lO, 1983 the cooperation being received from the businesses such as from the Chamber of Co~nerce in San Diego and the establishment of an ad hoc committee; 8) the number of complaints received per week - an average of five; 9) abandoned or disposable waste that is traceable - all costs will be billed to that company; 10) the time element for inspections; ll) the formula for the $75 fee vs. that of the $175 fee; 12) consideration of a sliding scale fee - the committee is looking into a "pay as you go system for next year". Tom Fuson, 333 "F" Street, Chula Vista, Mrs. Stocker, Stocker Foreign Cars, Broadway, and Patricia Porter, 418 "I" Street, Chula Vista, questioned Mr. Aker on the State law regarding hazardous waste materials; the responsibility of the disposer; the required inspections; and the permits issued by the State to the haulers of hazaradous waste material. Mr. Aker quoted the regulations from the Resource Conservation Recovery Act and the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation Liability Act. He remarked that the Health and Safety Code require the inspection fees to be a full cost recovery system and noted the full penalty phase of the program. City Attorney Lindberg stated that the law has been on the books since 1972 and the State is just now getting around to enforcing it. Assistant City Manager Asmus concurred stating that before Proposition 13, the County could have introduced the program with no fees; however, now they must charge for those inspections. Councilman Scott commented that if the City adopts the County ordinance it is, in fact, validating that ordinance and unless all of the cities within the County adopt a similar ordinance it just "won't fly". Councilman Moore felt the program is needed as there are benefits to be derived; however, he felt that the program, as a pilot program, should start off with a minimum personnel and proposed that each city in the County contribute up front money to start the program. Once it is shown that it is a good program, a lot of the fears that the businesses now have will be done away with. Councilman Moore added that the Council should ask the Board of Supervisors to hold in abeyance all fees until the pilot program is tested. Mr. Aker noted that five of the sixteen cities of the County have passed the ordinance; four of them are holding it at staff level until they see what the City of San Diego will do. RESOLUTION OFFERED BY MAYOR COX, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent. Councilman Malcolm stated he was against the present City ordinance. He would like to know where are the fees coming from, who will be exempt from paying these fees and exactly what businesses will be affected. Councilwoman McCandliss felt the ordinance should be adopted since it might short circuit a dump site where an accident could conceivably happen. She feels that the fees are exhorbitant and that they should be based on the amount of time taken for the inspections rather than for the number of employees in that business. City Manager Goss suggested that the resolution be redrafted and the issues raised by the Council addressed. City Attorney Lindberg stated he could bring back a revised resolution. Council Conference Meeting - 3 - February lO, 1983 MSUC (Cox/Scott) to refer this back to staff to look into the concerns expressed by the City Council and report back to the City Council at Tuesday night's meeting. MSUC (McCandliss/Scott) to refer to staff to look into the matter of coordinating the inspections of the Fire Department vs. that of the County Health Department in order to see what type of assistance the City can provide. Councilman Scott stated that he would like to see a sunset clause put into the resolution, either one year or eighteen months. MSUC (Scott/Moore) to have a sunset clause put into the resolution. MSUC (McCandliss/Scott) that the City Attorney be directed, through the City Attorney's Association to bring up this issue and have it debated and bring back to the City Council a sound resolution. 2. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT (None) 3. MAYOR'S REPORT (None) 4. COUNCIL COMMENTS a. Councilman Malcolm requested that the Redevelopment Agency Attorney be present at Tuesday evening's meeting for a Closed Session. City Attorney Lindberg stated that a Redevelopment Agency meeting should be called following the Council meeting. MSUC (Malcolm/Scott) to schedule a Redevelopment Agency meeting following the City Council meeting on Tuesday, February 15, 1983. b. Councilwoman McCandliss noted that the Council now has two interns working for them. She felt it would be appropriate for the Council to discuss guidelines for the interns at a Council Conference setting. MSUC (McCandliss/Malcolm) to schedule a City Council Conference to discuss the intern program. ADJOURNMENT at 6:25 p.m. to the meeting scheduled for Tuesday, February 15, 1983 at 7:00 p.m. WPG/0263C PG