Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1990/10/25 MI~ OF A REGULAR CONFERF2qCE AND MEETING OF THE CITY OF CI-K/LA VISTA Thursday, October 25, 1990 Council Conference Room 4:04 p.m. Administration Building CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Councilmembers McCandliss, Moore, Nader, and Mayor Cox ABSENT: Councilman Malcolm (arrived at 6:21 p.m.) ALSO PRESENT: John D. Goss, City Manager; Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney; and Vicki C. Soderquist, Deputy City Clerk OTHF, R. BUSINESS 2. REPORT CHLFLA VISTA 2000 RECOMMENDATIONS The staff responses to the recommendations of the six Chula Vista 2000 Subcommittees were provided to Council in Supplemental Budget Reports #43 and #47. During its June budget review sessions, the Council took action to provide funding for the new Cultural Arts, Child Care, and Economic Development Commissions as well as for the Chula Vista 21 Committee. The other Chula Vista 2000 and staff recommendations were held over for further Council discussion at a subsequent Council Workshop meeting. CLfltllral Ar~ Subcommittee - Jess Valenzuela, Director of Parks and Recreation reviewed the recommendations of the Chula Vista 2000 Committee and the staff responses. He stated the Cultural Arts Commission will set priorities at their next meeting. City Manager Goss stated one of the jobs of the proposed Cultural Arts Coordinator (to be placed on the budget Wish List) would be to obtain grants and funding for programs and salary. It is hoped that this position would work with the school districts, including Southwestern College. Councilman Nader recommended utilizing community volunteers until the Coordinator position could be created. Dency Souval, Chairman of the Cultural Arts Commissions, responded that the commissions needed to set their own priorities and bring recommendations to Council. Councilwoman McCandliss stated that several years ago there was a small theater arts group which had raised approximately $1,600 from the business community. She would like to have these funds transferred to the Cultural Arts Commission. Child Care Commission - Jess Valenzuela, Director of Parks and Recreation, reviewed the recommendations of the Chula Vista 2000 Committee and the staff responses. The Commission has had two meetings and are in the process of setting priorities. The recommendation for the intergenerational facility was very controversial. Minutes October 25, 1990 Page 2 Katy Wright, Co-Chair of the Subcommittee, stated there was a consensus on the recommendation for the intergenerational facility and questioned whether this recommendation should be assigned to a different committee OF commission. Councilman Nader requested that dissenting opinions, when a vote is split, be included in the reports to Council. He would like further information on pro's and con's of an intergenerational facility before Council is asked to take action on this item. Ms. Wright stated that the Commission had set three priorities for the upcoming year. They are: 1) a new directory, 2) work with other commissions and the Parks Department to test a model child care facility at a park site, and 3) the creation of a part-time staff position with funding from grants, schools, and the City. Mr. Valenzuela informed Council that the CV2000 and staff recommendations would be forwarded to the Commission on Aging and the Youth Commission for review. Parks and Recreation Commigsion - Jess Valenzuela, Director of parks and Recreation stated staff would have a report for Council in the spring for a city-wide parks development impact fee (DIF). It is hoped that a portion of the DIF would be utilized for an over-all parks master plan for the city. This would assess public, private, non-profit, and city facilities. Mayor Cox questioned the status of utilizing school facilities for city programs. Mr. Valenzuela responded that the city is currently having to pay for custodial services from the Sweetwater Unified District. It had been proposed that the city schools set aside field space with the Youth Sports Council as a master scheduler for city and school activities. The city has not received cooperation from the school district as of this date. MSC (CoX/McCandliss) to send a letter from the City Council to the Board of Trustees of the Sweetwater Unified District requesting their participation with the City in this program. Approved 4-0-1 with Councilman Malcolm absent. Library - Rosemary Lane, Library Director, reviewed the Chula Vista 2000 recommendations and the staff responses. She felt that they had made tremendous strides in the construction of three libraries. The Board of Trustees would like to form a Library Foundation which would be a non-profit organization, separate from the Friends of the Library. Donations could then be made for specific items or projects. Currently 17,000 people per week utilize the library. 3udy Schulenberg, Chair of the Chula Vista 2000 Subcommittee, stated that the committee felt that the needs of students were not being met by the Library at this time and also noted a severe lack of meeting rooms. Mayor Cox felt the best approach to take in the development of a local history museum would be to utilize the Information Center, when vacated, as the beginning of a museum. That location could also be an asset to the downtown redevelopment efforts, and felt that ultimately Memorial Park would be the ideal location for a local history museum. Environmental Issues and Open Space - Robert Leiter, Director of Planning, reviewed the Chula Vista 2000 recommendations and the staff responses. A gentleman from the audience informed Council that there was no zone in the City of Chula Vista that would allow a recycling facility. Minutes October 25, 1990 Page 3 Mr. Leiter responded that he was unaware of the omission in the zoning but with the direction of the Council he would have staff address the issue. MSC (Cox/Nader) to direct staff to evaluate whether there is adequate zoning to accommodate the needs of recyders. Approved 4-O-1 with Councilmall Malcoh:n absent. MSC (Cox/McCandliss) to refer the Chula Vista 2000 Subcommittee Report on Open Space end Environmental Issues to the Resource Conservation Commitsinn and the Parks and Recreation Commission. Approved 4-0-1 with Councilman Malcolm absent. Councilman Nader felt public information regarding recycling should be expanded and that the environmental review coordinator could work with the public information coordinator regarding these issues. Ken Larsen, Director of Building and Housing, reviewed the recommendations of the Chula Vista 2000 Committee on Beautification and Code Enforcement and the staff responses. Economic Development and Jobs - Chris Salomone, Director of Community Development reviewed the Chula Vista 2000 recommendations and the staff responses. He informed the Council that the new Economic Development Commission would be meeting for the first time on November 7th and would review the recommendations from CV 2000. The recommendations will also be reviewed by the Blue Ribbon Committee on Housing. Councilman Nader referred to a program he had arcended at the League of Cities conference which stressed that there be a balance between housing and jobs and insuring that they were compatible. He hoped that the citizens of Chula Vista were qualified to fill the jobs that might be created in the future. Deputy City Manager Thomson felt that the first task for the Chula Vista 21 Committee would be to focus on the bond issue proposal and requested that Council provide direction. Councilman Nader responded that he would not want Council to presuppose that the primary issue would be the bond proposal. He felt the bond issue should be included but that the committee should be flee to develop their own options. He would like to make a referral at a later date to the Chula Vista 21 Committee inviting suggestions on the best format for Council participation and interaction when working on priorities. Mayor Cox stated it was the recommendation of the Chula Vista 2000 Committee that the bond issue proposal be addressed by the Chula Vista 21 Committee. He then complimented staff, Deputy City Manager Thomson, Chairs and Co-Chairs for their work on the Chula Vista 2000 Committee. City Council recessed at 5:50 p.m. and reconvened at 6:21 p.m. to the adjourned City Council meeting in the City Council Chambers, located in the Public Services Building. Councilman Malcolm arrived at 6:21 p.m. 3A. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY: Presentation to the City Council in honor of Red lh'bbon Week - Don Swanson Boardmember, Substance Abuse Task Force presented Council with shirts in commemoration of Red Ribbon Week. Minutes October 25, 1990 Page 4 CONSENT CALENDAR (Items pulled: 3, 4A & 4B, and S) BALANCE OF CONSENT CAI .ENDAR OF'F'M1ED BY COUNCILWOI~dq I~CCANDLISS0 reading of the text was waived, passed and approved unanimously. 3. REPORT REGARDING TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX, PRESENTING SIX ORDINANCE OPTIONS WHICH WOULD ALLOW TAX INCREASES WITH AND WITHOUT ANNUAL ABATEMENT HEARINGS - At the Council meeting of 10/16/90, Council placed all of the above ordinances on first reading with the intent of holding further public discussions on 10/25/90 to determine whether one of the options should be placed on second reading and adoption. Staff recommends that Council place Ordinance 2407, Option 2 on second reading and adoption. (Director of Finance) Pulled from the Consant Calendar./qq~5 City Manager Goss noted this was started last may during the budget process. The rates had not been adjusted for some period of time, and much of the revenue base is flat and not responsive to the economy. The City is not at the point of having to cut services, but out of a $42 million operating budget, approximately $1.5 million was one time only revenues. The State was also considering taking away the auto lieu tax which is approximately 11% of the City's operating budget and is forcing the County to charge the City for booking prisoners and property tax collection. Those issues are unresolved, but it would amount to $500,000 for this current year. There will be a need for an additional fire station, library, community center, and staffing. The Council, under the law as it has evolved, has the authority to execute certain taxing powers as a Charter City. Proposition 136 would force a tax sharing situation which would not allow a Charter City to exercise its taxing power. The transient occupancy tax is currently down and the number of residential building permits is not as high as in the past. The short term policy choices are to either reduce expenditures, raise revenues or a combination of both. One of the options available at this point would be to set the tax at one rate and collect it at a lower rate, this would also protect the Council's home rule option. Councilwoman McCandliss noted that all businesses were facing the same situation the City was and questioned the fairness of raising taxes and whether it was necessary. City Manager Goss responded that it was important for the Council to protect their ability to set taxes and noted the abatement process included. He felt that if the business license tax had been indexed when created in 1955, and had increased with the economy, it would not be an issue before the Council tonight. Councilman Malcolm questioned which services would be cut and which services would not be implemented if the taxes were not approve& CiW Manager Goss replied that many things had been done to keep costs down. The number of employees per thousand is the lowest of all cities in the county. Services to be cut would be a policy decision that would have to be made during the budget process. All departments would be reviewed at that time for cutbacks. If the taxes were approved, he could not guarantee that any programs would be enhanced. They have met with the business community and recommended that the increases be phased in over a period of time and not based on gross receipts. Councilman Malcolm questioned why there was a special break proposed for new businesses coming into Chula Vista. City Manager Goss responded that was one of the recommendations from the Chamber of Commerce. They felt there was a problem encouraging businesses to locate on Third Avenue and that a break (for the first Minutes October 25, 1990 Page 5 year) for small businesses of five persons or less would be an incentive. The proposal for the transient occupancy tax (TOT) is for an increase from 8% to 10%. He felt the best recommendation would be to set the TOT at 10% maximum with an abatement hearing to set it at 9%. Lou Black, 282 Third Avenue, Chula Vista, California, expressed her displeasure with the Downtown Business Association and its operations and felt it should be changed or disbanded. She requested help from the City in straightening out some of the problems with the Association. She requested that Council not approve further assessments. Lyman Christopher, Director of Finance, responded that the Downtown Business Association does appear before Council once a year to outline their activities. Part of their funding is from the Town Centre assessment, other funding is from activities held during the year. He was unaware as to whether they assessed dues to the businesses. A budget is also submitted to the Council on how the funds will be expended. Helene Bump, 231 Third Avenue, Suite C, Chula Vista, California, representing Bump Tax Service, stated there was not a definition listed for ~professional', even though they would be taxed at twice the rate. Martin Chase, Assistant Director of Management Services, replied that there would be no changes in the definitions included in the Municipal Code. The only thing that would be changed would be the rate. Tommy L. Lott, 138 Glenhaven Way, Chula Vista, California, stated he was a new business owner and did not object to an increase in the business license tax, but felt a 300% increase was excessive. Jerry Matsumoto, 1079 Jacqueline Way, Chula Vista, California, representing Landscape Enterprise, objected to a substantial increase in the business license tax. He does not have a fixed business and did not feel the benefits to businesses, i. e,, fire and police protection, was applicable to his business. He questioned why the new growth areas and developments were not being taxed in such a way as to increase the revenues for the City. He also questioned the policing of businesses not obtaining businesses licenses and felt those working within the system were being penalized. Taxes should be based upon profits and not gross receipts. Councilman Nader questioned whether Proposition 136 would affect the ability of the City to increase the building permit fees. Lyman Christopher, Director of Finance, replied that it would not. He noted that the Master Fee schedule had been increased every several years and tied to the index, but the business license fee had not been updated or raised. Pat Dowling, 2638 Shelter Island Drive, San Diego, California, Property Manager for Traveler Motel, spoke in opposition of the TOT. The TOT for his motel has increased by 109% and the increase for police services has increased by 129%. He felt the reasons the motels were competitive with other cities was because of the lower rates. Funds utilized for special events were activities for the community and did not attract tourists. He stated there was currently a direct line to the Radison in National City from the Visitor's Center. Councilman Nader expressed his surprise and concern over the line to the Kadison and questioned whether Mr. Dowling would be interested in working with staff on some of these issues in the future. Councilwoman McCandliss questioned whether the Radison paid for this service and if the service was offered to businesses in Chula Vista at a reduced or flee rate. Minutes October 25, 1990 Page 6 ) Mr. Dowling responded that the Visitors Center was a for-profit organization, but he felt the report was misleading in stating that $600,000 was being spent on community advertising. Parricia Leslie, 272 Minot Avenue, Chula Vista, California, representing the Chula Vista RV Resort, spoke in opposition to the TOT. She stated that toufism had been down over the last two years and a raise in the TOT would produce a negative situation. The increase would have to be passed through to the customer and she did not feel they would be able to stay competitive. Mike Bell, 111 North Second Avenue, Chula Vista, California, representing San Diego KOA, spoke in opposition to the TOT. He stated they compete against a large regional area and felt the increase would not allow them to remain competitive. He questioned whether the campground industi3t could be removed from the hotels/motels with their rates remaining at 8%. Michael L. Steiner, 538 Be~and Way, Chula Vista, California, representing 188 business people within the Chula Vista area spoke in opposition to the business license tax. He noted this would be the largest single tax hike in the history of Chula Vista, not only in money but also in percent. He gave a brief history of the progression of the proposed business license tax increase. He stated the proposals did not receive the endorsements of the business people, but of the Executive Committee of the Chamber of Commerce. He stated his group represented 7.5% of the 2,509 Chula Vista businesses. They opposed the increase due to: 1) deficient fiscal philosophy, 2) bias found in the documents, 3) legislative process, and 4) endorsement misrepresentation. The businesses did not feel they had been represented by the Downtown Business Association or the Chamber of Commerce in their endorsements of the proposals. They requested that the City consider cuts and look at the historical perspective of the licensing fee. Charles Craig, 416 L Street, Chula Vista, California, representing Marti-Jo's Menagerie, spoke in opposition to the business license tax increase. He stated he had not seen an increase in the services received and questioned why businesses carry the burden of increased fees. He felt the increases would put him out of business. Don Swanson, 187 Murray Street, Chula Vista, California, representing Lady L Fashions, spoke in opposition to the business license tax increase. He felt money was being spent foolishly and mismanaged and that there should be cuts within the City. Tom Davis, 1657 Gotham Street, Chula Vista, California, spoke in opposition to the business license tax increase. He felt that the letter mailed to businesses was misleading as the reader had the impression that the fee increase was a "done deal'. Council should not authorize an automatic tax increase which would require that Council take special action in order to avoid an increase. He requested that Council retain the current business license fee and encourage business, not discourage it. Mr. Christopher responded to Mr. Steiner's comments stating that this is the largest tax increase since 1984 but he could not attest to increases prior to that date. The reason this is a large increase is because fees have not been increased since 1978. The number of businesses in Chula Vista is between 5,000 and 5,500 and not the 2,509 as quoted by Mr. Steiner. City Manager Goss stated the Chamber was willing to discuss the expenditure of monies from the TOT designated for advertising with representatives from the hotel/motel industry. The comparison of other cities was for information only and not justification for raising taxes. The letter Mr. Davis referred to was sent to the businesses in order to inform them of the public meetings regarding the proposed actions. There was a special committee of the Chamber of Commerce which did make a recommendation to the Board of Directors, and it was his understanding that the Board of Directors did support the proposals. Staff was not "'~ Minutes October 25, 1990 Page 7 present at the meetings held by the Chamber. The proposal before Council is to bring the business license fee up to current indexing. Councilman Nader referred to Proposition 136 and stated the action tonight was to insure that the City Council had the ability to collect these taxes after a public hearing. He would not support an increase in the TOT and felt it would put the tourist indusu'y at a disadvantage. He could support an option where at a later time, if the economy changes and after a public hearing, the City could collect a higher TOT. He would like information from staff as to whether growth is paying its own way. Councilman Malcolm felt staff should be commended for working with the Chamber and Downtown Business Association and that as a businessman, he felt he had been well informed, but he did not agree with the recommendations from staff. As a businessman he was willing to pay more taxes, if there was a reason to raise taxes. The City should keep maximum flexibility, but until the City shows cutbacks and the revenues are still not efficient, then it would be time to consider increasing taxes. He could support giving the Council flexibility and approve the proposals with immediate abatement down to existing levels. He would consider a small raise in the business license fee, but not the major increase proposed. Councilman Moore felt that if something was not done with the tax base for the City, services would be cut throughout the City. He would prefer there not be a tax increase and noted that an auto park, development of the bay front, etc. would result in a major infusion of revenues to the City. The City should be run the way the community wants it run and not how Sacramento wants it run. Councilwoman McCandliss stated that there should be a fair increment of increase, but in reality, one time period could not be selected to "catch up". The Council needs to maintain their flexibility due to the circumstances in November. As far as the TOT, she does shop room rates when traveling, and felt an unrealistic increase would make a significant impact. She would like to see the Council retain its flexibility with a reasonable phase in period and abatement available. She expressed concern over harming the business community if the increases were approve& Mayor Cox felt Council had been elected to make these decisions whether easy or hard. The utility user's tax had not been raised since 1978 and he felt that was a credit to prior Councils. Subsequent City Councils will need to have the flexibility to meet the increasing costs of government and there is a need to take action to insure that they can modify fees within a reasonable amount. He felt there was a need to increase all three taxes but that the timing was terrible. Given the current situation, he would take action to increase the TOT with the ability to abate it back down to 8% (Option 1). City Attorney Boogaard responded that if Option 1 was adopted, Council would have to schedule a yearly abatement hearing. This could be scheduled, with public hearing being noticed twice within twenty to twenty-five days. The abatement would be the lowering of the 10% set tonight to 8%. Deputy City Manager Thomson stated the proposed ordinance takes effect immediately but that due to notification required, it could not be in place until January, 1991. Therefore, Council would have time to abate the TOT. ORDINANCE 2407 - OPTION I PLACED ON SECOND READING AND ADOPTION BY COUNCILMAN MALCOLM, reading of the text was waived. The ordinance was offered with the understanding that it does not take effect until 1/1/91 and a public hearing for abatement is to be scheduled as soon as possible. Councilman Malcolm requested recommendations from staff regarding an increase in the TOT at the time of the abatement hearing next year. He noted there were several activities that would be held in the City and San Diego that would improve the visitors senrlng economy. Minutes October 25, 1990 Page 8 Councilman Nader stated that Option S seemed m be the only alternative that did not take effect immediately and would give the Council the ability to abate before it takes effect. He requested an opinion from the City Attorney regarding the legality of abating Option 1. City Attorney Boogaard stated it would be impossible to enforce Option 1 before an abatement hearing could be held. Option 5 provides for a three year phased increase with the power of abatement. The restraint of Option 5 is that the Council does not retain its maximum flexibility. If Option 1 were adopted increasing the TOT to 10%, Council could then immediately abate it back to less than 10%. City Manager Goss replied that administratively, it would be impossible to implement Option I before January of 1991. City Attorney Boogaard stated he agreed with City Manager Goss regarding the implementation of the increased TOT. VOTE ON ORDINANCE 2407 - OPTION 1: approved unanimously. MSUC (Moore/Nader) to direct staff to bring forth the abatement proceedings prior to the Christmas holidays with the appropriate notification to the business COmmHItit~. ORDINANCE 2407 - ORIGINAL AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING SECTION 3.40.030 OF CHAPTER 3.40 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE TO INCREASE THE TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX TO TEN PERCENT (10%) (second reading and adoption} ORDINANCE 2407 - OPTION I AN ORDINANCE OF THE ta-lY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING SECT]ON 3.40,030 OF THE CHAPTER 3.40 OF THE CHULAVISTA MUNICIPAL CODE TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX TO TEN PERCENT (10%) SUBJECT TO ANNUAL ABATEaMF2q~ BY THE CITY COUNCIL (second reading and adoption) ORDINANCE 2407 - OPTION 2 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING SECTION 3.40.030 AND ADDING SECTION 3.40.034 TO CHAIrFER 3.40 OF THE CHUIAVISTA MUNICIPAL CODE TO INCREASE THE TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX TO NINE PERCENT (9%) IN 1991, AND TEN PERCENT (10%) IN 1992 SUBJECT TO ANNUAL ABATEMENT BY THE CITY COUNCIL (second reading and adoption) ORDINANCE 2407 - OPTION 3 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING SECTION 3.40.030 OF CHAFFER 3.40 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE TO INCREASE THE TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX TO NINE PERCENT (9%) COMMENCING JANUARY 1, 1991 AND TO TEN PERCENT (10%) COMMENCING JANUARY 1, 1992 (second reading and adoption) ORDINANCE 2407 - OPTION 4 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING SECTION 3.40.030 OF CHAPTER 3.40 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE TO INCREASE THE TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX TO TEN PERCENT (10%) OVER THE NEXT FOUR YEARS (second reading and adoption) ORDINANCE 2407 - OPTION S AN ORDINANCE OF THE ta'li OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING SECTION 3.40 OF THE CHULAVISTA MUN[CIPAL CODE TO INCREASE THE TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX TO TEN PERCENT (10°6) OVER THE NEXT FOUR YEARS SUBJECT TO ANNUAL ABATEMENT BY THE CITY COUNCIL (second reading and adoption) Minutes October 25, 2990 Page 9 4.A. REPORT REGARDING BUSINESS LICENSE TAX, PRESENTING SIX ORDINANCE OPTIONS WHICH WOULD ALLOW TAX INCREASES WITH AND WITHOUT ANNUAL ABATEMENT HEARINGS - At the 10/16/90 Council meeting, Council placed all of the ordinances representing an array of options, on first reading with the intention of deferring public discussion of the proposed business license tax increase until 10/25/90, at which rime Council would decide whether ro place one of the ordinances on second reading and adoption. Staff recommends Council place Ordinance 2408 A on second reading and adoption. (Director of Finance) Pulled from the Consmr Calendar. /~/of, City Manager Goss stared numerous meetings were held regarding the proposed business license tax. Letters were also sent to 6,500 businesses and the Chamber of Commerce and Star News have endorsed the proposal. If the tax had been indexed when originally set, the proposal would not be before Council for review. Lyman Christopher, Director of Finance, stated Option B or E would be phased in and allowed abatement back to the 1991 rates. This would mean a doubling of the current business license tax in 1991 and then the next year Council would have the opportunity to abate back to the 1991 rates. City Attorney Boogaard informed Council that Option B provides a two year phase in and Option E provides a three year phase in. After reaching their 100% level, both provide for a 6% per year increase. That is the maximum power (6%) Council can abate. It was his opinion that Option B gave the Council the greatest flexibility. ORDINANCE 2408E PLACED ON SECOND READING AND ADOPTION BY COUNCILWOMAN MCCANDL[SS, reading of the text was waived. City Attorney Boogaard stated the power of abatement is not granted to the Council until 1992 under Option E, then the power to abate goes to the 1991 floor. Councilman Nader expressed his concern over the inability to work with the business community regarding their concerns. He stated ir was his opinion that the initiative would not go into effect until the day after the election and Council would be having a meeting on November 6th in which this could be addressed. Council could offer an amendment which would allow abatement back to the current levels (1990) and have second reading and adoption on November 6th. City Attorney Boogaard responded that Proposition 136 states it applies to any tax enacted on or after November 6, 1990. Since it is not an effort to increase a tax but to determine the power of abatement, it is possible that changing the abatement power after November 6, 1990 would not constitute a tax increase prohibited by that section. To be especially safe, he recommended that the ordinance be placed on second reading, with a modification to Page 4A-168, Paragraph E, to read 1990. Councilman Nader stated that if Council voted for the amendment to abate back to 1990 levels, he would vote for the ordinance. If the amendment was not passed, he would not support the ordinance. VOTE ON ORDINANCE 2408E: approved 3-2-0 with Councilmembers Malcolm and Nader voting no. MS (NaderAVIoore) direct staff to bring back an ordinance at next Council meeting to grant the City Council power to abate the business license tax back to the 1990 base level. Mayor Cox stated he felt there was a need for an increase in the business license fee. The fee had not been increased since 1978 and the proposed increase was justified. He also felt that voting against the increase would not be in the best interest of the City. Minutes October 25, 1990 Page l0 ) Councilman Nader stated his motion only gave Council the ability to abate back to the 1990 levels and at this time he was not sure he would vote for the abatement himself. Councilman Malcolm felt the timing was wrong for the increases and that the City should also be held accountable. He felt an abatement hearing every year would involve considerable staff time and that a decision had been made and Council should move forward. VOTE ON MOTION: failed 1-4-0 with Mayor Cox and Councilmembers Malcolm, McCandliss, and Moore voting no. ORDINANCE 2408 A AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULAVISTAAMENDING-H-rLE 5 AND SECTION 8.20.020 OF THE CHULAVISTA MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING BUSINESS LICENSE TAX RATES (second readin:~ and adoption) ORDINANCE 2408 B AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING TITLE 5 AND SECTION 8.20.020 OF THE CHULA VISTA MDNICIPAL CODE REGARDING BUSINESS LICENSE TAX RATES (second reading and adoption) ORDINANCE 2408 C AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULAVISTAAMENDING TITLE 5 AND SECTION 8.20.020 OF THE CHUIA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING BUSINESS LICENSE TAX RATES (second readinE and adoption) ORDINANCE 2408 D AN ORDINANCE OF THE CI'IY OF CI-IULAVISTA AMENDING TITLE 5 AND SECTION 8.20.020 OF THE CHUIA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING BUSINF_~S LICENSE TAX RATES (second reading and adoption) ORDINANCE 2408 E AN ORDINANCE OF THE ~'t Y OF CHULAVISTA AMENDING TITLE S AND SECTION 8.20.020 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING BUSINESS LICENSE TAX RATES (second reading and adoption) ORDINANCE 2408 F AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULAVISTA AMENDING TITLE 5 AND SECTION 8.20.020 OF THE CHUIA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING BUSINESS LICENSE TAX RATES (second teadinE and adoption) B. RESOLUTION 15898 AMENDING THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE TO REFERENCE THE ASSESSMENT CURRENTLY CHARGED BUSINESSES IN THE DOWNTOWN IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT AND TO MAKE OTHER MISCRI .I .~NEOUS CHANGES - The proposed changes to the business license tax ordinance require corresponding changes in the Cit'fs Master Fee Schedule. These changes will have no impact on the fees charged, except to extend the assessment to insurance companies and banks located in the Downtown Improvement District. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Finance) Continued from the Council meeting of 10/16/90. Martin Chase, Assistant Director, Management Services, stated that if Council increased the business license tax, staff wanted to make sure that there would be no increase in the assessment charged to businesses in the downtown improvement district. Therefore, the resolution was being offered to Council for review. Lyman Christopher, Director of Finance, stated that because the business license tax was being increased, staff felt it was unfair to also increase the downtown improvement district assessment. RESOLUTION 15898 OFFERED BY MAYOR COX, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved '~ unanimously. J; Minutes October 25, 1990 Page 11 5. REPORT REGARDING UTILITY USER TAX, PRESENTING AN ORDINANCE TO CREATE AN ANNUAL TAX ABATEMENT HEARING PROrT~.BURE FOR THE LrrILITY USERS' TAX, AND PRESENTING THREE ORDINANCE OPTIONS WHICH WOULD ALLOW ADjUSTMENTS TO THE MAXIMUM ANNUAL RATES WITHOUT INCREASING THE PRESENT TAX RATES OR TAXES - At the Council meeting of 10/16/90, Council placed all of the ordinances on first reading with the intent of continuing the public discussion to 10/25/90 at which time Council would decide which, if any, of the ordinances would be introduced for second reading. Staff recommends that Council place Ordinance 2409 A on second reading and adoption, and ff Council desires to provide a method for increasing the maximum annual utility users' tax in the future, then staff recommends that Ordinance B, Option 3 also be placed on second reading and adoption. (Director of Finance) Pulled from the Consent Calendar. /W~7 City Manager Goss stated the proposal allows Council to retain the authority they currently have if Proposition 136 passes. Council has authority to set one rate and then collect at a lower percent and options had been incorporated which would allow future Councils to set a higher cap. Councilman Nader stated he had a problem with this increase because it hits those on disability, low incomes, seniors on fixed incomes, etc. He would like to have an ordinance brought back, if the utility user's tax is approved tonight, that would reduce the tax for those on Hlife line rarer. He also wanted to provide for an advisory vote before actual collection was increased. He would not vote to increase collections. City Manager Goss stated Ordinance 2409A was designed to give Council the same authority as they have always had. ORDINANCE 2409A PLAC:RD ON SECOND READING AND ADOPTION BY COUNCILMAN MALCOLM, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved unanimously. MSUC 0McCandliss/Nader} to direct staff to bring back an informational report on *life line rates' and the City Council's ability to abate. City Attorney Boogaard informed Council that Ordinances A and B were independent of each other. Ordinance B - Options 1, 2, and 3 provide Council with greater power of tax flexibility, and ability to set future increases at varying rates. Councilman Nader stated he understood the position the City Attorney was taking and that he would vote for the ordinance only if an amendment was offered which would require a vote of the people before any increase was made in the utility users tax. City Attorney Boogaard pointed out that there were three components to the utility users tax: 1) telephone tax (self indexing), 2) fixed unit tax for thems, and 2) kilowatts. Under one of the three options, increases could be implemented in the future and still continue abatement authority. MSUC (Nader/Malcolm) to direct staff to bring back an ordinance requiring a majority vote of the public before any increase in collections of the utility users tax could be implemented under any of the B Ordinances, if one should be adopted. ORDINANCE B - OPTION 3 PLACED ON SECOND READING BY COUNCILWOMAN MCCANDLISS, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved 4-1-0 with Councilman Malcolm voting no. City Attorney Boogaard informed Council that he would bring back an ordinance for second reading and adoption at the next meeting which would amend Ordinance 2409A and require a mandatory vote of simple majority. Minutes October 25, 1990 Page 12 ) ORDINANCE 2409 A AMENDING SECTION 3.44.150 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO REQUIRE ANNUAL PUBLIC HEARINGS TO SET VARIOUS UTILITY USERS TAXES AT RATES LESS THAN THE MAXIMUM IMPOSED (second readin~ and adoption) ORDINANCE B- OPTION I AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROVIDE FOR SEQ~ INCREASES IN THE MAXIMUM UTILITY USERS' TAXES YET SIJBJECT TO ANNUAL TAX ABATEMENT HEARINGS (second readin~ and adoption) ORDINANCE B - OPTION 2 AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROVIDE FOR 1997 INCREASES IN THE MAXIMUM UTILITY USERS' TAXES YET SUBJECT TO ANNUAL TAX ABATEMENT HEARINGS (second readin~ and adoption) ORDINANCE B - OPTION 3 AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROVIDE FOR COST OF LIVING INCREASES IN THE MAXIMUM UTILITY USERS' TAXES YET SUBJECT TO ANNUAL TAX ABATEMENT HEARINGS (second readin~ and adoption) 6. RESOLUTION 15910 AUTHORIZING SPEOAL STUDIES RELATF. D TO VARIOUS pARcRt .q OI~I~ED BY NRLqON SLOAN COMPANY AND AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURE OF NOT MORE THAN $40,000 FOR THOSE STUDIES - The Redevelopment Agency has authorized staff to analyze the desirability of-acquiring a number of parcels owned by Nelson & Sloan Company south of Main Street between Broadway and Beyer Way for the purpose of fostering economic development. To complete that analysis, it is necessary to obtain certain special studies and to appropriate funds for those studies. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Community Development) ,/"-/o8 7. RESOLUTION 15911 ALrI~IORIZINGTHEGrlYMANAGERTOREQL1ESTPARTICIPATIONINTHE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAIVI, AND APPROPRIATING $48,255 FROM THE UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE OF THE GENERAL FUND AND APPROVING SIGNATURE RESOLLrI~ON - The City has expressed interest to the State Office of Emergency Services to participate in the Emergency Management Assistance Program. The initial request has been approved and the City has been directed by OES to begin implementing a Disaster/Emergency Preparedness Program for which OES will provide up to $22,553 of a total $48,255 required for the remainder of FY 1991. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Fire Chief) 4/5's vote required. * * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * * OTHER BUSINESS 8. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None. 9. ITEMS pUIJ.F.F) FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR (Items pulled: 3, 4A & 4B, and 5) The minutes will reflect the published agenda order. 10. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT(S) - None Minutes October 25, 3.990 Page 13 11. MAYOR'S REPORTf S) a. Ratification of appointments to Boards, Commissions, and Committees - Continued to the meeting of November 6, 1990. 12. COUNCIL COMMENTS - None ADJOURNMENT City Attorney Boogaard informed Council there was no need to meet in Closed Session regarding potential litigation. ADJOURNMENT AT 9:38 P.M. to the Regular City Council Meeting on November 6, 1990 at 4:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. Respectfully submitted, BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CMC, City Clerk Vicki C. Soderquist, Depu~\,City Clerk