Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1996/08/20MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TIlE CITY OF CHULA VISTA Tuesday, August 20, 1996 6:10 p.m. Council Chambers Public Services Building C~LTOO~ER ROLL CALL: PRESENT: ALSO PRESENT: Councilmembers Alevy (arrived at 6:32 p.m.), Moot, Padilia, Rindone (anived at 6:50 p.m.), and Mayor Hotton. John D. Goss, City Manager; Ann Moore, Acting City Attomey; and Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG, SILENT PRAYER 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: June 25, 1996 (Special Joint Meeting of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency), June 25, 1996 (Adjourned Regular Joint Meeting of the City CouncilfRedevelopment Agency), and June 25, 1996 (Joint Meeting of the City Council/Planning Commission) MSC (Moot/Padilla) to approve the minutes of June 25, 1996 (Special Joint Meeting of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency), Jane 25, 1996 (Adjourned Regular Joint Meeting of the City Coancil/Redevdopment Agency), and Jane 25, 1996 (Joint Meeting of the City CoancilVHanning Commission) as presented, approved 3-0-2 with Alevy and Rindone absent. 4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY: a. Proclamation was presented by Mayor Pro Tem Moot to Hector Ornelas, Chula Vista Jr. High School Principal, and Environmental Engineering Students (1996 Summer School Program) - Kareen Burger, Angelina Parker, Thomas Shoots, Amanda Linn, David Cooper, Kristine Kyle, Oilin Lopez-Navarro, Karine Velasquez, Julie Burger, Salvador Cano, Jesus Alejandre, Rommyna Maguo in recognition of their innovative program and for their efforts and talents in bringing the program forward. b. The oath of office was administered by City Clerk Authelet to John Cochran, Parks and Recreation Commission, and Diana Rude, Parks and Recreation Commission. c. Proclamation commending the Bonita Valley All-Star, 14 years of age end under, Softball Team was presented by Mayor Pro Tern Moot. Certificates of appreciation were presented to the girls. CONSENT CALENDAR (Items pulled: 6 end 7) BALANCE OF CONSENT CALENDAR OF/~ERED BY MAYOR HORTON, reading of the text was waived, headings read, and approved 3-0-2, with Alevy and Rindone absent. 5. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: a. Letter from the Acting City Attorney stating that the City Coancil did not meet in Closed Session on 8/13/96. It is recommended that the letter be received and filed. Minutes August 20, 1996 Page 2 6. RESOLUTION 18412 APPROVING A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTAND WITH THE SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT AND THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN SAME ~ The Port District is proposing to enter into a MOU with the member cities as a furtherance of their commitment to allocate $9 million annually from fiscal year 1994/95 through fiscal year 2001/02 to fund the tidelands projects approved as part of the Port District's Capital Improvements Program. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Community Development) Councilmember Rindone stated that what troubled him was the last sentence under the fiscal impact statement: "There is no guarantee that all funds will be disbursed in any given year or carried over if not disbursed. ' He agreed with trying to get the MOU and the funds to the South Bay cities but it seemed like the distributionof money was not in the same manner to Sen Diego as it was to the four South Bay cities. It seemed like the $4.5 million annually was going to be spent out of Port funds to the City of San Diego for their projects and it was benefitring everybody but these projects that were also impacting the four South Bay cities. The point he was trying to make was that Chula Vista should be guaranteed the $63 million, the fair share that the Port had determined, and if all $9 million were not equally spent in a year then the City would lose out on that. Chtis Salomone, Director of Community Development, responded that their practice had a been to carry the money over and thought that was the spirit of the agreement. He did not think they would lock themselves into an absolute guarantee, but felt the intent during negotiations had been to lock the money up for the City's use. He thought there was qualifying language in the agreement to deal with whatever emergency came along, but again, the practice thus far had been to carry the money over and staff expected that was what they would do and also to allow the City to reallocate. RESOLUTION 18412 OFFERED BY COUNCILMEMBER RINDONE, AND REQUESTING THE CITY MANAGER CONFIRM AN UNDERSTANDING ABOUT THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE $63 MILLION AND UNLESS IT IS AN EMERGENCY IT WOULD BE CARRIED OVER TO BE UTILIZED FOR THE FOUR SOUTH BAY CITIES PROJECTS, reading of the text was waived, heading read, and approved 4-0-I, with Moot absent. 7. RESOLUTION 18413 AUTHOR/ZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND PACIFIC SOUTHWEST BIOLOGICAL SERVICES FOR CREATION OF WETLAND HABITAT - Pacific Southwest Biological Services designed a grading plan for a 10-acre site to be vegetated in accordance with a Mitigation Plan for biological impacts associated with construction of Phase I Road improvements to Otay Valley Road. The grading plan has resulted in undesirable habitat conditions. The agreement addresses corrective action to be taken by Pacific Southwest Biological Services. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Community Development) Councilmember Padilia asked if there was a relationsMp between the $36,924 that was withheld and the specifications provided by PSBS that caused the problem. Joseph Monaco, Env'tromnental Projects Manager, responded not direc~y; they withheld when it was discovered that the design was failing and they were the only monies that were left unpaid of any of the contract to Pacific Southwest. The actual design services that resulted in the defects in the construction had been paid long before, possibly in 1992. RESOLUTION 18413 OHyERED BY COUNCILMEMBER PADILLA, reading of the text was waived, heading read, and approved 40-1, with Moot absent. Minutes August 20, 1996 Page 3 8. RESOLUTION 18414 ACCEPTING $30,000 IN GRANT FUNDS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES, TOBACCO CONTROL SECTION AND AMENDING THE FY 1996/97 BUDGET TO APPROPRIATE $30,000 TO THE COMMUNITY TOBACCO EDUCATION GRANT BUDGET - On 1/17/95, Council approved a twenty-four month grant from the California Department of Health Services, Tobacco Control Section for $120,000. The intent of this report is to discuss the progress of the grant program and request acceptance by the City of the $30,000 in grant funds for the final six months of the project. (Director of Parks & Recreation) MSC (Horton/Alevy) to reconsider Item #8 because it required a 4/Sth's vote (it had originally been approved as part of the Consent Calendar with a 3-0-2 vote), approved 4-0-1 with Moot absent. RESOLUTION 18414 O/a~'ERED BY MAYOR HORTON, reading of the text was waived, heading read, and approved 4-0-1 with Moot absent. * * * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * * * PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES 9. PUBLIC HEARING ZAV-96-12; APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO INCREASE THE HEIGHT OF A ROOFTOP SIGN FROM 35 FEET TO 42 FEET FOR THE COMMERCIAL BUILDING LOCATED AT 396 "E" STREET IN THE C-T THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL ZONE - MARTIN ALTBAUM - This is an appeal from the Planning Commission's denial of a request for a variance to allow the construction of a rooftop sign to 42 feet in height for the commercial building located at 396 "E" Street, within the C-T Thoroughfare Commercial zone. The C-T zone limits the height of rooftop signs to 35 feet above grade. Staff recommends item be continued to 9/17/96. (Director of planning) Continued from the meeting of 7/9196. MSC (Horton/Moot) to continue the it{~n to 9/17/96, approved 3-0-2 with Alevy and Rindone absent. 10. PUBLIC HEARING PCA-96-06: CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROVIDE A PROCESS FOR DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSING - In 1995, the City Council approved a Resolution delegating temporary authority to the Chief of Police to make determinations as to whether certain types of alcoholic beverage licenses should be granted, in situations where there is already an over concentration of licenses based on specified criteria. This report provides for the permanent processing of such applications. Staff recommends item be continued to 9/10/96. (Director of Planning) MSC (Horton/Munt) to continue the itetn to 9/10/96, appcoved 3-0-2 with Alevy and Rindone absent. 11. PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERING THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY FORMERLY KNOWN AS INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD - The owner of the property adjacent to a 0.61 acre parcel of land formerly known as Industrial Boulevard, also formerly used as a Park and Ride Lot by Caltrans, has requested that the City vacate the parcel. In order to process the vacation, Council mast first conduct a public hearing in accordance with the California Streets and Highways Cede. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works) Minutes August 20, 1996 Page 4 RESOLUTION 18415 ORDERING THE VACATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY FORMERLY KNOWN AS INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD NORTH OF "L" STREET TO CERTAIN CONDITIONS Cliff Swanson, City Engineer, presented the staff report. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open. There being no public testimony, the public hearing was declared closed. RESOLUTION 18415 OF/~ERED BY COUNCILMEMBER MOOT, reading of the text was waived, heading read, and approved 4-0-1 with Rindone absent. 12. PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERING THE OTAY RANCH REORGANIZATION NUMBER 1 CONSISTING OF ANNEXING PORTIONS OF THE OTAY RANCH TO THE CITY, DETACHING THE OTAY LANDFILL FROM THE CITY AND DETACHING TERRITORY FROM THE RURAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT - In August 1995, Couacil authorized the filing of a reorganization application with LAFCO for the Otay Ranch Reorganization Number 1. The proposed reorganization would annex the majority of the Otay Valley Parcel, the Mary Patrick Birch Estate Ranch House and the Inverted "L" area to the City. The reorganization was filed with LAFCO on 4/8/96. On 7/1/96, LAFCO approved the reorganization, designated the City as the conducting authority and authorized Council to conduct the proceeding to complete the reorganization process. Staff recommends item be eontinued to 9/10/96. (Speeial Planning Projects Manager, Otay Ranch) Item continued from the meetin~ of 8/13/96. MSC (Hotton/Moot) to continue the item to 9/10/96, approved 4.0-1 with Rindone absent. 13. PUBLIC HEARING ADOPTING OTAY RANCH PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS - Staff recommends Council place the ordinances on first reading. (Deputy City Manager Krempl) Continued from the meeting of 8/13196. A. ORDINANCE 2680 RESCINDING THE PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND SNMB, LTD, JEWELS OF CHARITY, AND STEVEN AND MARY BIRCH FOUNDATION (second readinlt and adoption) - Staff recommends that Council not adopt the ordinance. (Deputy City Manager Krempl) Related item: not a hart of the oublic hearing. B. ORDINANCE 2687 ADOPTING THE PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND JEWELS OF CHARITY (first reading) (Deputy City Manager Krempl) C. ORDINANCE 2688 ADOPTING THE PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN TRE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND SNMB, LTD. (first reading) D. ORDINANCE 2689 ADOPTING THE PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND STEPHEN AND MARY BIRCH FOUNDATION (first reading) George Krempl, Deputy City Manager, presented the staff report. This being the time and place as advertised, the public heating was declared open. Minutes August 20, 1996 Page 5 · Gregory T. Smith, P.O. Box 2786, Rancho Santa Fe, representing SNMB and Stephen & Mary Birch Foundation, spoke in favor of the staff recommendation. There being no further public testimony, the public hearing was declared dosed. RESCINDING ORDINANCE 2680 AND PLACING ORDINANCES 2687, 2688 AND 2689 ON FIRST READING Olfl~ERED BY COUNCILMEMBER MOOT, reading of the text was waived, headings read and approved 40-1 with Rindone absent. 14. PUBLIC HEARING ADOPTING OTAY RANCH PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Vv'ITH BALDWIN BUILDERS - The purpose of this item is to present a development agreement with Baldwin Builders. On 6/25/96, the Planning Commission and Council considered a series of development agreements with Village Properties, United Enterprises, Greg Smith, and the Foundation. (The Foundation agreement was subsequently split into three separate agreements). The remaining party who is a property owner of a portion of the Otay Ranch property is Baldwin Bnilders, which is the trustee for the bankruptcy. Staff recommends Council place the Ordinance on first reading. (Deputy City Manager) A. ORDINANCE 2690 ADOPTING OTAY RANCH PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND THE BALDWIN BUILDERS (first reading) Deputy City Manager Krempl presented the staff report. The following people spoke in opposition to staff recommendation, stating that those from San Marcos, the Paloma community, had dealt with Baldwin Builders and told of their negative experiences and problems and wanted to warn Council to be careful so the same things did not happen in Chula Vista: · Robert Blatt, 1416 Corte Bravo, San Marcos; · Karen Christian, 742 Avenida Amigo, San Marcos; · Nina Patterson, 661 Avenida Cordoba, San Marcos; · Mary Lejeune, 764 Via Bahia, San Marcos; · Darrell W. Gentry, Councilman, City of San Marcos, 1 Civic Center Dr., San Marcos; and · Shari L. Speerstra, 673 Corte Loren, San Marcos. · Robert Ghiloni, 304 E. Oneina Street, Chula Vista, spoke in opposition to staff recommendation, stating that he had a daughter and son-in-law that hved in Paloma. · Phil Sainz, 1912 Marques Court, Chula Vista, spoke in opposition to staffrecommendation, stating that he lived in the Baldwin built community of St. Claire. · Bill Brasher, 17550 Gillete Avenue, Irvine, representing the Baldwin Builders, spoke in favor of staff recommendation. There being no further public testimony, the public heating was declared closed. Councilmember Moot stated he was obviously disturbed about what he heard. Before approving a development agreement with a bankruptcy trustee, he wanted to know from staff if there were problems in the St. Claire development, was St. Claire a different situation than the one people from Sun Marcos spoke about. He did not want to put Chula Vista homeowners in the same position that the people from San Marcos had been put in and Minutes August 20, 1996 Page 6 City Manager Goss was not sure the two were really related other then the fact there were similar circumstances in that when the bankruptcy occurred there were homes under construction that were not completed and if they are not completed, they will be condemned end have to be taken down. The rnle of the trustee, when you have a bankruptcy, is to take that property end try to deal with the bankruptcy representing those entities. It seemed to him that the Baldwin Builders, as now operated, should be encouraged to proceed. Councilmember Alevy understood that the Chairman of the planning Commission lived in the St. Claire development end that the Planning Commission had voted 5-0 in favor of the development so he was not sure if they were similar situations. Chula Vista did not have a Mello-Roos, lendscal~mg, or lighfmg districts so part of what those from Sen Marcos were talking about would not be in effect in Chula Vista. He was concerned about what the people from Sen Marcos had said end concerned about the fact that there was some apparent problems in Chula Vista that he had not been aware of. He asked staff to explain the difference between a reimbursement district and an assessment district, how it may be affected by Proposition 218, end if they needed to be concerned. John Lippitt, D/rector of Public Works, responded that en assessment district is where you go through the proper noticing end hearing to pay for improvements. Then en assessment is placed on each parcel. A reimbursement district is where en improvement is put in by a developer, the city or some other party, end a reimbursement district is formed so when someone comes in end gets a building permit he has to pay his fair share of the improvement, end that is called a reimbursement; the money is reimbursed back to the party who put in the improvement, Councilmember Alevy said so the owner of the lend, translated in this case as the developer, pays for end constructs certain improvements end then as they or another builder, depending on the situation, complete that phase or complete that work, it is reimbursed hack to the developer so it doesn't impact the City riseally, Mr. Lippitt responded the reason we put that in there was because them may be improvements that would impact more then one developer so we had a requirement that if they were being benefitted by a certain improvement that the developer would have to reimburse the other person if a district was established. Councilmember Alevy asked what the statement 'The City will cooperate in the provision of utilities to the project' meant. Mr. Krempl thought that was just a generic reference to the City providing sewer end other utilities that we normally would to eny development once they get a subdivision map appruved. Councilmember Alevy was concerned about some of the horror stories they were hearing about what was happening elsewhere in the County. He asked what protection the City has against be'rag impacted by the same sort of results end what additions to the agreement could be made to protect Chula Vista's citizens. Mayor Herton asked if some of the issues that Councilmember Alevy was addressing wouldn't be addressed when they entered into more specific agreements later on. Mr. Krempl said the only entitlements that this property owner had was a General Plen Amendment end a General Development Plan at a very broad level simply indicating numbers of dwelling units end types of development that would be allowed in certain areas. The most promotion would be put into the SPA plan end into the tentative map. Mayor Herton added that the Pre-Annexation Development Agreement addressed the fact that they would have to enter into agreements for public facilities end capital improvement plans and they may went to tighten the screws when they got to that next stage. This was more of a broad perspective of what they intended to do in the future. However, being aware of some of the issues that had surfaced this evening, they need to be aware of what could happen to the City if the situation with Baldwin continues end what protections need to be in place. Minutes August 20, 1996 Page 7 Councilmember Rindone said that on page 14-6, at the end of the first paragraph, it stated that "Baldwin Builders has requested that the provision of Section 5.3 be added to protect them from the burden of conveying open space land for Village Development entitlements." He asked staff to explain why that request had been made, what impacts it had on the City and how that related to the proposal before them. Mr. Krempl responded that the Otay Ranch General Development Plan was approved as a total entity with some 11, 000 acres of open space to be conveyed. The only portion of the property that had a conveyance plan at present was SPA I, and part of that property that was going to be conveyed as a condition of SPA I was located in Villages 10 and 11 and under the control of Baldwin Builders, the trustee for the bankruptcy. Baldwin Builders wanted it made perfectly clear that they shall not be obligated to dedicate property which was for the sole purpose of satisfying an obligation of Village Development. Therefore, if Village Development was not able to comply with the conveyance plan, they had the option and the alternative in paying an in lieu fee so that the property could be acquired that needed to be dedicated or turned over to the City for open space. They either dedicate the lend or, if they cannot dedicate the land, they pay the in lieu fee. The in lieu fee was yet to be established and was being worked on by City staff, but would be a requirement prior to their ability to get a final map and secure building Ann Moore, Acting City Attorney, stated that particular provision does not excuse Baldwin Builders from having to dedicate or convey land for development on its property in accordance with the conveyance plan. What the provision stated was that they would not be obligated to dedicate land for building entitlements to be received by Village Development which was a different entity. MS (Rindone/Horton) to trail this item to the next regularly scheduled meeting September 10 and direct staff to provide a written report addressing the issues that have been raised, the impacts of these concerns if there is any relationship on existing rules and regulations that would impact the enti~ements that are granted by this pre-annexation agreement, the potential impact on the pre-annexation process, and a detailed report on any similarities or dis-similarities with the St. Claire project and provide that review to Council prior to bringing this hack in three weeks. Councilmember Padilia stated that the City of Chula Vista and the City of San Marcos do not have the same types of funding mechanisms; Chula Vista had policies concerning how much of an assessment could be levied on the total value of a home and there were other mechanisms in place that examined that. He thought it important that everybody understood they were looking at a Pre-Annexation Agreement that had a lot to do with just pre- annexation. The parties needed that kind of an agreement before getting to the level where LAFCO would have approved the development to begin with. The Development Agreement had a loose frame work about the kin& of mechanisms that would be used to fund public infrastructure, the limits of those, the timing of those, and the noticing of those. It has provisions for default on the part of either party. That includes some specific remedies and also the ability of the City to come up with some others that are not spelled out in the agreement. They were not at the stage where they were looking at specific agreements on imposing impact fees or approving a particular design or a particular development. He felt the issues regarding the Otay Ranch neu~ted to be examined very carefully, deliberately and slowly. Any agreement approved, Coun(d had to be comfortable enough with it to know that the City had enough ability to enforce and enforce affectively. They do not want to see the same problems attributed to a potential development in Chula Vista that has happened in another area, and they were going to do everything to make sure that does not occur. Council will examine those things in detail. He felt that in all fairness to the applicant, he needed to mention that not all of those things were exactly applicable in their particular situation. Councilmember Moot stated he would like to support the continuance of Ordinance 2690 and giving staff an opportunity to report back to Council on the items that Council were concerned about. He also wanted to pass on to the bankruptcy trustee that serious attention needs to be made to the homeowners concems. Often it had been his experience as an attorney that too much money in bankruptcy matters went into attorney's fees, administration fees, and all sorts of other fees. It was his hope that when money becomes available in the bankruptcy estate that it be directed to the people who were being affected and hurt by the situation and not to pour a lot of money into fees, expenses and administrative costs. VOTE ON MOTION: approved unanimously. Minutes August 20, 1996 Page 8 Mayor Herton stated that the City Council meeting would be recessed because consultants were present on another item involving a Re, development Agency item. Council messed at 8:00 p.m. and reconvened at 8:58 p.m. to go into Closed Session to discuss existing litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54969.9, Christopher vs. the City of Chula Vista. and anticipated litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9, Metro sewer issues, and public employee release pursuant to Govemmant Code Section 54957. Council recessed at 8:59 p.m. and reeonveaed at 10:25 p.m. * * * * * Councilmember Moot left the meeting at 10:20 p.m. * * * * * 15 . A. RESOLUTION 18416 APPROVING THE RESOURCE CONVEYANCE PLAN FOR THE OTAY RANCH SPA I - (This is a related item. but does notreQuire a oublic hearing.) B. RESOLUTION 18417 APPROVING THE INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT AND THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA - {This is a related item. but does not require a nublic heating). C. PUBLIC HEARING PCS-96-04; CONSIDERATION OF TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR THE OTAY RANCH SPA ONE, CHULA VISTA TRACT 96-04, GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD BETWEEN PASEO RANCHERO AND THE FUTURE SR-125 ALIGNMENT - Re, certification of FEIR 95-01 and Addendum and reapprova/of the Statement of Overriding Consideration and Mitigation Monitoring Program. Approve the Tentative Map for Otay Ranch SPA One, Chula Vista Tract 96-04, in accordance with the Findings of Fact and subject to the Conditions of Approval. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Otay Ranch Special Planning Projects Manager) Continued from the meeting of 8/6/96. D. RESOLUTION 18398 APPROVING A REVISED TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR PORTIONS OF OTAY RANCH SPA ONE, CHULA VISTA TRACT 96-04, AND MAKING THE NECESSARY FINDINGS, ADOPTING THE SECOND ADDENDUM TO AND RECERTIFYING FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FEIR 95-01 (SCH #95021012) AND READOPTING THE STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE FEIR, AND DENYING APPROVAL OF ALTERNATIVE TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP PROPOSALS MSC (Horton/Padilla) to continue the item to 9/10/96, approved 3-0-2 with Alevy and Rindone absent. ORAL COMMU~CATIONS · Bill Ayers, 44 East Mankate Street, Chula Vista, stated that Governor Wilson had signed both the Knight and Peace bill the day before. It had been a long haul, ten years, from the enabling legislation to now and finally getting the Veteran's Home in Chula Vista. He hoped they would be breaking ground the following year. Mayor Horton expressed Council's appreciation to Mr. Ayers and the other Veterans who had worked hard on the project. She knew that it was of high importance that the facility be built in the Chula Vista community, and it was a facility that they would welcome with open arms. Minutes August 20, 1996 Page 9 BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS - None submitted. ACTION ITEMS 16. RESOLUTION 18418 ADOPTING MUNICIPAL POLLUTION PREVENTION POLICY, RECOMMENDATIONS AND BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES TO REDUCE THE USE OF TOXIC MATERIALS IN THE CITY'S OPERATIONS AS IDENTIFIED IN THIS POLICY - The Environmental Health Coalition (EHC) and the City worked joinfly on a multi-year Municipal Pollution Prevention project. The project was funded by a $30,000 grant to EHC from the Jesse Smith Noyes Foundation. The goals of the project were to: (1) audit the use of toxic products in the City's public places and work areas; (2) reduce the use of toxic materials used in City operalions; and (3) create a model for other cities to follow. Staff recommends approval Of the resolution. (Environmental Resource Manager). Barbara Bamberger, Environmental Resource Manager, presented the staff report. · Diane Takvorian, 1717 Kettner Blvd., #100, San Diego, rapresenting Environmental Health Coalition, spoke in favor of the staff recommendation. · Joy Williams, 1717 Kettner Blvd., #100, San Diego, representing Environmental Health Coalition, spoke in favor of the staff recommendation. Councilmember Rindone asked who kept the material safety data sheets and could they not also be a source to get the names of the producers of the product so that they could be translated to other languages, particularly Spanish. Ms. Bamberger responded that each department retained their material safety data sheets within the department so that the employees could have access to them. In addition, copies were also kept in the Risk Management Office. In terms of being able to use that information and translate that into Spanish, that would help although it provides content information rather than product label information. Councilmember Rindone thought staff should seriously consider this and that something should be done. He said that maybe the manufactures would provide that information in Spanish because Chula Vista was not the only community that would certainly have that need. He also asked if staff could also take the material safety data sheets and find out the producers of those particular products and who manufacmses those and then in turn request those manufacmsers to provide that information for product usage in Spanish as well. Ms. Bamberger responded that staff would look into that. Councilmember Rindone stated that it was very important and that they may be able to get help from local businesses to make the information available to them as a parmership because of the number of constituents who would be able to benefit from the other translation other than English and maybe even in Tagalog if that proved to be essential. Councilmember Alevy stated that marketing figures showed the point of purchase information was the best way to get the information to people. RESOLUTION 18418 OIfFERED BY COUNCILMEMBER ALEVY, reading of the text was waived, heading read, and approved 4-0-1 with Moot absent. Minutes August 20, 1996 Page 10 17.A. RESOLUTION 18419 ACCEPTING PROPOSALS AND AWARDING CONTRACTS FOR POLICE INITIATED TOWING AND STORAGE SERVICES TO ANTHONY'S TOWING, SOUTH BAY TOWING, PAXTON'S TOWING, AZ METRO TOWING, AND J. C. TOWING - On 3/7/95, Council authorized Police Department staff to design a competitive process to select providers of Police initiated Towing and Impound Services. Proposals were accepted on 6/30/95, with twelve providers raspending. The process used was designed to improve the tow serviceis provided to consumers and the City while enhancing General Fund revenues through the implementation of a referral fee paid by tow companies under contract with the City. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Chief of Police) B. RESOLUTION 18420 AMENDING THE POLICE INITIATED TOWING SERVICE RATE SCHEDULE AND IMPLEMENTING A REFERRAL FEE. The following people spoke in opposition to staff recommendation stating that the RFP process took well over a year, the staff person conducting the initial RFP was no longer with the City, their disfavor with the referral fees, and that they were not informed of the proper contract length: · George Bagdasarian, 4501 Otay Valley Road, Chula Vista, representing Alcon Towing; · Peggy Rollin, 622 Del Mar Avenue, Chula Vista, representing Arnold's Garage; · Ed Wood, 140 Reed Court, Chula Vista, representing Glenview Towing. The following people spoke in favor of staff recommendation: · John Clark, 553 Friendly Court, E1 Cajon, representing J.C. Towing; · Duane Pudgil, 378 San Miguel Drive, Chula Vista, representing South Bay Towing; · Brad Ramsey, 850 Energy Way, Chula Vista, representing A to Z Metro Towing; Mayor Herton asked staff to address some of the concerns from the vendors that were not being recommended and spoke against the staff recommendation. Rick Emerson, Chief of Police, responded that Kevin Hardy had started the process but then left the City's employment and they were without a Principal Management Analyst for over six months so that did slow the process down. They learned that morning that the new Principal Management Analyst was out ill and they had the option of continuing the item but felt it had taken long enough and opted to go forward. The referral fee was something that Council had reviewed approximately 12 months prior and directed staff to include as part of the process so that there would be as close to a full cost recovery on towing operations as possible. Mayor Herton asked if there was an average response time and if one company could not respond for two to three hours, would staff then call another towing company. Chid Emerson responded that if one towing company could not respond, they would then call the next company; the average response time was 20 minutes. Councilmember Alevy stated it was his understanding that the five towing companies rotated so that each one had equal opportunity to be first up. He asked if there was any kind of a follow-up survey or threshold that needed to be met on the standards that were conducted during the time of the agreement. Chief Emerson responded that they looked at the performance and if there was a problem with response time, and the problems continued to exist, staff would sit down and talk with them. There was a contract that they needed to meet. If someone lost their contract for having their storage or release facility in the City, they would then have to make the transition, develop another spot, or otherwise they would be in violation of the contract and we would then separate them because ofnot being able to pefform the services. This would be done administrativaly. Ifone company were dropped or backed out, then staff would have to go out with an RFP to replace that company. Minutes August 20, 1996 Page 11 Councilmember Padilia stated that given the last time frame on the rate adjustments that they were looking at a fair adjustment end given the administrative burdens, the referral fee was appropriate. RESOLUTIONS 18419 AND 19420 OF~ERED BY COUNCILMEMBER PADILLA, reading of the text was waived, heading read. Councilmember Rindone stated that Council had always been an advocate of doing business with Chula Vista companies first and noted that the nine finalists were all from Chula Vista. He asked if a referral fee would be charged ira consumer selected a towing company that was not on the public initiated towing services fee list, if the fee was only applicable to the five that were award the centract. Chief Emerson responded that the fees were Police initiat~l towing rates end only applied to the five companies be'rag awarded contracts. He also concurred that people are always asked if they want their own towing enmpeny called or, if they don't have one, have the Police towing garage contacted. Councilmember Rindone stated that there had been two companies who had long term contracts with the City who were not within the top five as a result of the ranking and asked how the points were arrived at. Lt. Art Gawf responded that they were basically graded three times to make sure that the top five were actually viable candidates. One was basically a subjective type scoring, another one was more of an objective type scoring, and then they went to combining scoring. Councilmember Rindone was trying to determine how a company could move up in points. In other words, between a 31 and a 33 was only two points, that seemed close. What was differentiating the companies in that range? Lt. Gawf responded in that particular range, they either passed or failed on a particular part of the RFP. If they did not pass, or did not meet the requirement, they got no points. If they met the requirement, they got one point end it was a simple addition of the number of points. Councilmember Rindone pointed out that of the five companies selected the top score was 33 and the bettom scorn of those five companies was 31, or a differential of only 2. Yet there was a differential of 4 points between number five and number six which was more than double the span of the difference between the first and the fifth and that was a significant difference relatively in viewing the ranking. He asked how long the contracts were b(mg awarded for. Chief Emerson responded the contract was for five years and at the end of those five years staff would go to an RFP again. Councilmember Rindone asked if it had been clear to the applicants that they were bidding for a five year contract. Lt. Gawf believed Principal Management Assistant Hardy had some negotiations at the beginning of the RFP process, and he thought it had changed somewhat, but was not sure as to how that developed at the early stages of the RFP. There were some questions in the beEinning as to whether it would be a three year contract with a two year renewal, or a two year contract with a three year renewal. VOTE ON MOTION: Approved 4-0-1 with Moot absent. 18. REPORT REGARDING PROPOSED MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT AT THE MTDB "H" STREET TROLLEY STATION - On 7/1/96, the Planning Department received a request from Edward F. Wagner for a letter of support for a proposed five story, 105-unit multiple family residential development project planned to be constructed above the existing parking lot at the Metropolitan Transit Development Board's (MTDB) "H' Street Trolley Station. The requeste~l letter of support is intended to be included with Mr. Wagner' s formal project proposal to MTDB. Staff recommends Council authorize the Director of planning to forward a letter to Mr. Wagner end MTDB providing comments regarding the development proposal. (Director of Planning) Robert Leiter, Director of Planning, stated that staff had summarized their roco/nlnendation in their report; that this was to provide comments to MTDB on the proposal which MTDB would then consider in evaluating a possible agreement with this particular developer to proceed. Minutes August 20, 1996 Page 12 MSC (Horton/Padilla) to approve staff recommendation. CounciLmember Rindone stated that he was going to support this. He also wanted to make a public statement that he thought there were a lot of concerns with the project and he wanted to say it up front so this would not come back to bite them and have people say why didn't you mention that. They were looking at the Port and the City putting 'H" Street through. He thought that was going to seriously impact master planning of the region and the trolley station was key to that; also looking at potential debilitating affect of 105 low cost homes in th~ area. He was going to sopport staff's recommendation because he thought staff was approaching the challenge very carefully, but he was not initially encouraged that this type of project was designed for the area. When "H" Street gets put through, that wilt be the gateway to the Bayfront and the gateway to the City and that was going to be a major entrance, and he was not particularly thrilled with that type of development being the first appearance into the City. A lot of work still needed to be done, and it should be given serious consideration. Councilmember Alevy stated that he was voting against the project because he did have a problem with that sort of density being built at a very visible and very important gateway to the City. He thought it would send the wrong message about a very progressive City. He thought that there was a very strong and important place for affordable housing in the community, but did not think that it was at the gateway. Mayor Herton wanted to add that they were talking about affordable housing, they were not talking about housing that looks affordable in the old term. They were looking at something that cmdd be very progressive and innovative. VOTE ON MOTION: approved 3-1-1 with Alevy voting no and Moot absent. ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR Items pulled: 6 and 7. The minutes will reflect the published agenda order. OTHER BUSINESS 19. CITY M~NAGER'S REPORT(S'~ Mayor Herton and Councilmember Rindone asked that the items under the City Manager's Report be continued to 9/10/96. Scheduling of meetings. Report on additional Assistant City Manager position. Report on Chula Vista Population Change 1/1/96. CIP Expenditures in Western Chula Vista. 20. MAYOR'S REPORT(S) a. MSC (Horton/P, indone) to ratify the appoingments of Walter L. Fisher, Otay Valley Road Project Area Committee; Dr. Barry Russell, Cultural Arts Commission, Leo Kelly; Commission on Aging, and Fred Dufresne, Housing Advisory Commission, approved 4-0-1, with Moot absent. b. RESOLUTION 18423 TAKING A POSITION TO OPPOSE AB 956, WHICH IS NOT ADDRESSED IN THE LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM AND THEREFORE REQUIRES DIRECT COUNCIL ACTION - The City's 1995/96 Legislative Program was amended by Connc~ on 12/12/95. A/though this program was intended to provide comprehensive direction to the Legislative Committee on City's legislative priorities, there are certain issues which are reserved for direct action by Council. The Legislative Committee recommends approval of the resolution. MSC (Horton/Alevy) to approve Resolution 18423. Minutes August 20, 1996 Page 13 Councilmember Padilla stated that he was going to vote against the recommendation of the Legislative Committee because the issue of the regional needs of an international hub for the San Diego County region had been long debated. The actions of the San Diego City Council which were controversial in deciding which way to go or not go with the City Manager's recommendation on a compromise plan, to go ahead and utilize the full site will not, in his opinion, preclude the expansion of Lindbergh Field. Depending upon whom you talk to, everybody wants to solve the airport problem. The expansion of Ijmdbergh Field is only going to solve the problems for another couple decades. The region needs to make a decision about a regional international hub that serves a community like San Diego on the Pacific rim well into the future. Ask any pilot that flies into Lindbergh Field, it is not the greatest location, we am do better. The issue about Camp Nimitz has been decided. He supported the compromise that the City Manager in San Diego put forward. Camp Nimitz by itself was not going to be the solution for Lindbergh's expansion needs and not having Camp Nimitz was not going to kill the expansion needs of Lindbergh Field. A decision has been made, the regional facility is important to the San Diego commtmity, important to our economy, important to our image, that has been demonstrated. The majority of San Diego's Council went with that decision, and they need to move on with that. Then this community needs to start realistically discussing the regional international transportation needs of San Diego County. Mayor Herten pointed out that the defeat of the Bill would not negate the possibility of a public safety institute, but it merely preserved several options for the site and would prevent those options from being restricted or determined at the State level. She recommended that they keep their options open and support her recommendation and the Legislative Committee's recommendation to oppose. Councilmember Alevy stated as someone who put a lot of time into the fight against the airport at Otay Mesa, his main support of the Mayor's motion was because it could open up the possibility of a bi-national airport, and he would never vote in favor of anything that would make that a possibility. Vote on motion: 2-1-1-1, with Padilia voting no, Moot absent and Rindone abstaining. Councilmember Rindone requested that the item be re-calendafed, the item had been inadvertently left out of his packet, and he really wanted to mad this carefully. Colleen Kelly, Legislative Analyst, responded that the Legislature will have adjourned for the year by the time Council met ag~m. Mayor Horton responded that possibly Mr. Rindone could read it while they were going through the other items. Council recessed at 11:46 p.m. and reconvened at 12:12 p.m. RESOLUTION 18423 OFFERED BY MAYOR HORTON, reading of the text was waived, heading read, and approved 3-1-1 with Padilia no and Moot absent. 21. COUNCIL COMMENTS - None. Minutes August 20, 1996 Page 14 Meeting adjoume~l at 12:14 p.m. 22. 23. CLOSED SESSION CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING: Exisfi.~g litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 ® Christopher vs. the City of Chula Vista. Anticipated litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9. · Metro sewer issues. lrtJBLIC EMPLOYEE RELEASE - Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957 CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR - Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6 s Agency negotiator: John Goss or designee for CVEA, WCE, POA, IAFF, Executive Management, Mid-Management, and Um'epresented. Employee organization: Chula Vista Employees Association (CVEA) and Western Coancil of Engineers 0YCE), Police Officers Association (POA) and International Association of Fire Fighters CIAFF). Um'epreseated employee: Executive Management, Mid-Management, and Unrepresented. REPORT OF ACTIONS TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION Respectfully submitted, BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CMC/AAE, City Clerk Car~~~ by: , ~ '