HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1991/07/23 MINUTES OF A REGULAR Iv~IqllNG OF THE
CHY OF CHULA VISTA
Tuesday, July 23, 1991 Counc~ Chambers
6:05 p.m. Public Services Bufiding
CAt,t.RD TO ORDER
1. CALL ~ ROLL:
PRESENT: Counc~members Grasser Horton, Malcolm, Kindone, end Mayor Pro
Tempore Moore.
ABSENT: Mayor Nader
ALSO PKESENT: Sid Morris, Assistant City Manager; Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney; and
Vick/C. Soderquist, Deputy City Clerk
2. pI.KI1GE OF ie-IJ~GIANCE TO THE FLAG. SILENT PRAYER
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: June 18 and July 9, 1991 (Joint Meetings of the City
Council/Redevelopment Agency)
MS(: (Rindone/Moore) to approve the Minutes of June 18 end July 9, 1991 as presented. Approved 3-0-1-1
with Mayor Nader absent end Councilwoman Grasser Honon abstainlag.
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY:
a. Oath of Office: Naomi Ross - Chula Vista 21 Committee. Oath of office was administered by Deputy
City Clerk Soderquist.
CONSENT C~I .F. NDAR
Citems pulled: 6A, 6B, end 7)
BALANCE OF CONSENT CALENDAR OFI--I~..D BY MAYOR PRO TEMPORE MOORE, reading of the text was
waived, passed and approved 4-0-1 with Mayor Nader absent
5. WRri-iP/4 COMMUNICATIONS: None.
6.A. ORDINANCE 2457 AMENDING CHAPTER 9.06 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE R~tATING TO
REGULATION OF SECURITY ALARM PERMITS (second readinz and adoption) - (Chief of Police) Continued
from the 7/9/91 meeting. Pulled from the Consent Calendar. I~f~? 1~5:~.~
James Arcediano, 9842 Hibert 5~eet, Sen Diego, CA, representing AM.S, spoke in opposition of the staff
recommendation to Resolution 16266. He requested that Council approve AM.S. for management of the
City's alarm ordinance. He then reviewed their qualifications and program. He stated that A.M.S. was the
low bidder and felt there were costing errors in Enforcement Technology, Inc. bid. They had been informed
Minutes
July 23, 1991
!Page 2
that the contractual period was for one year only and requested that they be given an equal opportunity to
review the terms and revise their bids accordingly.
Counc~woman Grasser Horton questioned how long they had been in business, principals, and number of
employees.
Mr. Arcediano responded that the finn was new and in operation for approximately three months. He and
his wife were the principals and only employees at this time.
Councilman RAndone questioned whether the time period had been specified when the project went out to
bid.
Chief Winters responded that it was one year with an option to renew for one year. This was not originally
put out for bid, cost estimates were requested. At that time there were only two companies responding,
Enforcement Technology, Inc. and WATF, staff was not aware of A.M.S. when this came to Council. There
has never been a formal bidding process.
Joseph W. Garcia, 484 5th Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, representing Sentry Alarm Company, spoke in opposition
to the staff recommendations. He felt that the proposed ordinance was currently included in the Municipal
Code but was not being enforced. He also felt the maximum f'me for false alarms should be $50.00 and the
alarm permit canceled until the problem was corrected. He expressed his concern over information being
given out on the alarms and persons and/or businesses owning alarms and felt this would be a violation of
Section 9.06.220 of the Municipal Code regarding confidentiality. He questioned why a staff person could
not be hired to track this program.
Mayor Pro Tempore Moore questioned whether there was a problem with confidentiality.
City Attorney Boogaard responded that he did not believe there was a conflict regarding confidentiality but
would bring the issue back to Counc~ if necessary.
Councilman Malcolm stated there were 6,500 false alarms a day and that it was costing the citizens a lot
of money to Ixack down. He also expressed his concern over information being released other than the name
of the business and location. Because Mr. Arcediano's fLrm is a San Diego company he would like to see
them have an opportunity but did not feel that a new company could be considered at this point when the
company recommended by staff was dealing with numerous jurisdictions and doing a good job. He would
'like to see that they are allowed to bid next year.
ORDINANCE 2457 PLACF_Z/ON SECOND READING AND ADOPTION BY MAYOR PRO TEMPORE MOORE,
reading of the ren was walved.
RESOLUTION 16266 OFFFlIED BY COUNCILMAN MALCOLM, reading of the text was waived.
Councilman Rindone stated he had a problem in voting for the highest of three bids. He felt there was an
advantage to the company serving the ~krst year and questioned whether the process should he forrealized.
Diso. tssion than ensued regarding the cost breakdown of the bids.
Councilman Rindone stated he was prepared to vote because staff had indicated that they would go out to
hid for the second year.
'Councilman Malcolm a requirement that the company provide the City the data base tape or disk.
Minutes
July 23, 1991
Page 3
Assistant City Manager Morris responded that the City could make that requirement but there was still the
concern that whatever company took over the second year would have compatible software. He would
recommend that it be in a format as decided by the City°
City Attorney Boogaard recommended that Council authorize the Mayor to execute a contract in a form that
is acceptable to the City Manager and City Attorney which will include such language the City Attorney will
draft to provide for the data base transfer. He also requested authority to add a provision on any privacy
clause he may feel appropriate.
~ (Malcolm/Rindone) to amend the contract as recornmanded by the City Atrorney. Apprnved 4-0-1 with
Mayor Nader absent.
VOTE ON ORDINANCE 2457 AND RESOLUTION 16266: approved 4-0-1 with Mayor Nader absent.
B. RF. SOLUTION 16266 APPROVING AG~ WITH ENFOR(IMF./~ TE(I-iNOLOGY, INC.
Pulled from the Consent Calendar.
7. ORDINANCE 2470 AMENDING VARIOUS CHAIrfERS OF SECTION 9.20 OF THE MUNICIPAL
CODE TO ALTER OR ENHANCE Tl-fll ~ AND/OR (2V]L PDIALTIF~ ASSOCIATED WITH GR.~'I'I'I,
RF_.LATED VIOLATIONS (first reading) -When Council considered the amendments proposed for chapter 9.20
of the Municipal Code at the July 16 Council meeting, they directed that staff return with further
amendments to 9.20. Staff recommends Council place ordinance on first reading. (Director of Public
Works)
City Attorney Boogaard requested that Council follow the flow chart in order to expedite the review process.
Ordinance ~- addresses Councilman Rindone's concerns regarding large graffiti ateactors and not totally
alleviate them from the seven day rule. If they have an existing graffiti removal program, the graffiti must
be removed within fifteen days.
It was the consensus of the Council: 1) not to 'decriminalize' the act of permitting graffiti to rema/n on ane's
property for more than seven days; 2) to introduce Ordinance E which would subject large graffiti attracton
to a fiftaen day time limit for removal; 3) place ordinance 2470 on second reading and adoption which
would give the City the right to enter on private property to remove graffiti; and 4) to introduce Ordinance
F which would require the private property owner to pay for removal of graffiti by the City.
City Attorney Boogaard stated that if the Council wanted to label the section regarding permitting graffiti
to remain Council should introduce Ordinance D.
Councilman Rindone felt the current ordinance as drafted affected the lit-de guy and that it should be
amended.
Councilman Malcolm stated he was prepared to support all staff recommendations and requested that
Council follow the flow chart submitted by the City Attorney.
Councilwoman Grasser Horton referred to the cost hearing (pg. 7-25 or question 7 on the flow chart) and
felt it would be better to limit the cost of removal. She felt this was a community problem and should not
be a financial burden on the property owner.
Mayor Pro Tempore Moore stated he would agree with her recommendation if it addressed residential only.
Minutes
July 23, 1991
Page 4
City Attorney Boogaard stated this was addressed in Handout #1 which would require an amendment to
ordinance 2470 to limit the cost of removal to $500 for residential and $2,000 for commercial/industrial.
Councilman Malcolm stated that if the graffiti is on public property it should be the Citys liability and
therefore pay 100%. If located on private properly it should be the responsib~ity of the properly owner.
He did not feel the burden should be placed on the taxpayer.
Mr. Byers stated the reason for criminal penalties was to address the issue of the absentee landlord or the
property owner that does not care. It is not envisioned that the private property owner will be charged for
graffiti removal as the intent of the program was to utilize Southbay Community Services to remove the
grattitio
MS (Malcolm/Moore) to amend the ordinance to allow any fees over $500/singie brn~y residence, not in
homeowners group, have right to appeal the bffi through the Public Works Department to City Council.
City Attorney Boogaard stated this would be included in Handout #1.
VOTE ON MOTION: approved 4-0-1 with Mayor Nader absent.
Councilman Rindone stated he did not support making wrongful display a criminal act, which would
necessitate the introduction of ordinance B-1. He would support the civil penalties for wrongful display.
Councilman Malcolm felt there should be maximum action taken regarding repeat offenders.
City Attorney Boogaard stated staff recommended the criminal penalty. If going through a store and a
violation is seen the store could be asked to lock up these materials. WithoUt a civil penalty the City would
not have that power and would have to rely on the economic motivation that the merchant is not going to
want to expose himself to civil damages. The only way that would be done is if something is stolen, damage
is done, it can be traced back to the store owner, and then there would be a civil trial with the merchant
only being charged what the cost of the damage was.
Councilman Malcolm felt that the City Attorney should bring back a policy for Council review where the City
could not prosecute criminally until the owner is put on notice by the City, in writing, of the wrongdoing
and only after a set number of days without taking action.
City Attorney Boogaard stated he agreed with the policy and would bring it back at the next reading. It was
not the Citlfs intent to put the store owners in ja~.
Councilman Rindone stated he continued to be opposed to criminal liab~ities. Those commitling the acts
ofgraffiti should be the ones facing criminal liabilities and he would continue to hold out for civil liability.
He would be receptive in reviewing this in the future.
Councilwoman Grasser Horton stated that the Chamber of Commerce had participated in the Task Force and
reviewed the provision and were in concurrence that the penalty should be criminal rather than civil.
Councilman Malcolm stated the only concern of the Chamber was that the store owners be notified before
action was taken by the City.
Councilman Rindone stated he agreed with the criminal penalty regarding the removal of graffifi, but could
not support a criminal liability regarding storage. The penalties should be the toughest on the perpetrators.
Minutes
July 23, 1991
Page 5
Counc~man Malcolm felt the City Attomey's recommendations were correct provided that violators were
notified on the first offense. The ordinance is not designed for those following the rides, but for those who
want to break the law or don't care about the ordinance. This was not different than drugs and it needed
to be stopped at the source. He felt all business owners needed to be notified, and if an offender is then
found, notice sent giving tan days before criminal charges are Fried.
City Attorney Boogaard stated that would be part of the enforcement policy that will be brought back to
Council for approval.
Councilwoman Grasser Hotton stated Council could request a mandatory rehearing in one year to evaluate
the whole ordinance with a brief report from staff at that time.
Mayor Pro Tempore Moore stated that it was the consensus of the Council that the section regarding.
Wrongful Display remain as currently drafted. Councilman Rindone was in support of ordinance B-1.
City Attorney Boogaard recommended that Handout #1 (question 8) be amended to delete everything that
is underlined and add a sentence to the end that would say *The decision of the hearing officer shall be final
with regard to the assessment eradicatlon charge unless it exceeds $500.00 and then it will be appealable
to the City Council".
MS (Malcolm/Grasser Hor~on) to approve staff recommendations I through 13 of the flow chaff, the
amendment to Handout I as described by the City Attorney, and direct the City Allorney to bring back an
amendment on the enforcement policy limt provides for immediate notice of the wrongful display provisions
to affected merPhants and provides ten day notice to correct prior to citation Approved 4-0-1 with Mayor
Nader absent.
City Attorney Boogaard informed Council that Ordinance E, Ordinance F, and Ordinance 2470 as mended
would have to be offered and read.
ORDINANCE (E) 2471, ORDINANCE (F) 2472, AND ORDINANCE 2470, AS AMENDED, PLACED ON FIRST
READING BY COUNCILMAN MALCOLM, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved 4-0-1 with
Mayor Nader absent.
MS (Moore/Rindone) direct staff to become involved with the major stores that have graffiti material, Le.
hand carrying notices, maldng appointment with senior manage-s, making staff available for assistance.
Councilman Malcolm felt that would be unfair to the small businessman, All businesses should be notified
with the a one page explanation of the ordinances.
AMENDMENT TO MOTION: (Moore/Malcolm) letter with Mayors signature to accompany the ordinance
with mailing to all businesses. Approved 4-0-1 with Mayor Nader absent.
Counc~man Rindone felt staff had done a good job but that action taken only addressed 10% of the problem.
He requested that staff: 1) get community involvement and participation, and 2) in as timely a manner as
possible have staff return with the ordinances that deal with the perpe~Tators.
MSC (Grasser Horton/Malcolm) to direct staff to bring back a mandatory repor~ in one year regardin~ this
ora!nan£e. Allproved 40-1 with Mayor Nader absent_
Minutes
July 23, 1991
Page 6
8. RESOLUTION 16267 APPROPRIATING $30,000 FOR LEGAL EIPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH THE
ISSUANCE OF THE STATE ROUTE 125 TOLL ROAD FRANCHISE - Council directed the retention of legal
services for waiver of, and then ~ing of, certain CEQA and contract causes of action against Cal Trans and
CTV as applied to the SR 125 wll road. A~ the time of the direction, the Council was unable to appropriate
funds for the expendin. we. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (City A~orney) 4/5th's vote
9. RESOLUTION 16268 APPROVING A 'NATIONAL NIGHT OUT' FUN RUN EVENT TO BE l-m. lx~
AT BAYSIDE PARK ON AUGUST 6, 1991 AND AJ. rrHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECU'IE A HOLD
HARMLESS INDEMNIFICATION AGREEME.NrF WITH THE PORT DI:}-IlilCT FOR THIS EVENT - August 6,
1991 will represent the eighth annual "National Night Out". National Night Out is a nationwide effor~ to
heighten crime prevention awareness, strengthen neighborhood spirit and police-community relations,
generate support and participation for local crime prevention programs and sending a message to criminals
that our communities are organized and fighting back. Staff recommends approval of the resolution, (Chief
of Police) 165zt:3
10~. RF_.SOLIYrlON 16260 /hopROVING AMENDMENT TO AGB~MENT WITH SWEETWATER
AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE FOR COLLECTION OF STORM DRAIN FEES - On 12/8/91, the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency proposed regulations for the issuance of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
0~IPDES) permits to regulate storm water discharge into the waters of the U.S. The final version of these
regulations were issued on 11/16/90. These permits wfil require agencies discharging storm water to
develop management programs for the control of pollutants. The City established a storm drain fee by
enacting Ordinance 2463 on 6/18/91. The storm drain fee will pay for the establishment and
.implementation of the NPDES program. Amendments to the agreements with the Sweetwater Authority and
~he Otay Water District will be needed to provide for the collection of said storm drain fees. Staff
recommends approval of the resolutions. (Director of Public Works) Continued from the 7/16/91 meeting.
B. RESOLUTION16261 APpROVINGAMENDMENTTOAGREEMENTWrrHOTAYWATERp~;~IICT
TO PROVIDE FOR COH-~-.CIlON OF STORM DRAIN I~-F_~
llA. RESOLUTION 16269 MAKING FINDINGS ON THE PEHllON FOR THE SALT C3F-PK I
~,SSESSMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 90-1 - FN Projects, Inc. (Baldwin Company) has submitted a petition
~questing assessment district financing of in.frasn-ucture improvements for their Salt Creek I residential
development. The owner has also submitted a map showing and describing the boundaries of the proposed
district. Certain improvements are located outside the City boundary necessitating the request for consent
and jurisdiction from the County of San Diego. Because of the complexity of the proceedings and time
!constraints, the owner has requested that Thomas O. Meade be retained as project manager for the district.
The current agreement with Municipal Financial Services, Inc. is being amended to delete the project
management services. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Director of Public Works)/~
B. RESOLUTION 16270 ADOPTING A MAP SHOWING THE PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF
2sk~SSW_.NT DISTRICT NUMBER 90-1 (SALT C~EE~(
C. RESOLUTION 16271 APPROVING A PROPOSED RESOLUTION OF lNl~_.~rllON ~ REQb'F_~-iWlG
C0HSENT AND J'UlflSDICTION FROM THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO FOR THE SALT CREEK I
Dtb-I111CT NUMBER 90-1
Minutes
July 23, 1991
Page 7
D. RESOLUTION 16272 APPROVING AIMENDMENT NUMBER ONE TO THE AGreeMENT WITH
MUNI CIP AL FINANCIAL SERVl CES, INC. AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO DIECUTE SAID AMENDMENT
E. RESOLUTION 16273 APPROVING AG~ln%IF_IqT WITH THOMAS O. MEADE FOR PROJECT
MANAGEMENT SF_.~VICES FOR THE SALT C~In~ I ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 90-1 AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECLFfE SAID AGREEMENT I~o
12.A. RESOLUTION 16274 MAKING APPOINTMENTS IN ASSF_.~SMENT DISTRICT NIJMBER 902 ((}'rAY
V~ILRy ROAD) - Preparations are being made m bring the Otay Valley Road Assessment District to the
Council in the near future for a public hearing, A portion of the proposed improvements and a parcel of
land proposed to be assessed are outside the City's boundary. As a preliminaPJ step in the proceedings it
is necessary to request consent and jurisdiction from the County of San Diego to construct the portion of
the road and to assess the land outside the City. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Director
of Public Works)
B. RESOLLrrlON 1627S ADOPTING A MAP SHOWING THE PROPOSED BOL1NDARIES OF
ASSESSMENT DI~-tK~CT NUMBER 90-2 (OTAY V,~J~Y ROAD)
C. RESOLIYI'ION 16276 APPROVING A PROPOSED RESOLUTION OF INt-~.e/rlON ~ RF~UF~TING
CONSEaST AND JUPdSDICI'ION FOR/L~qF..SSMF2qT DI~'fFdCT I~FtJMBER 90-2 {OTAY V/~IJ.I~7/ROAD}
I ~3
* * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * *
pUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLU'HONS AND ORDINANCES
13. PUBLIC ~G FORMATION OF CHULA VISTA OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE DI~fKICT
NUMBER 124, CANYON VIEWS - The developers of Canyon View Homes Subdivision have petitioned the City
for the formation of an open space maintenance district in accordance with the criteria contained in the
Municipal Code. On 7/9/91, the Council set July 23, 1991 as the date for a public hearing on the proposed
formation of Open Space Maintenance Disttict No. 24. Staff recommends Counc~ conduct the public hearing
and approve the resolution. (Director of Public Works) ./~K~
John Lippitt, Director of Public Works, gave a brief overview of the proposed formation of the Qpen space
maintenance district.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open.
Mayor Pro Tempore Moore stated that he was not comfortable with an assessment of $660.00 per year.
Mark gelton, 5109 Waring Road, San Diego, CA, representing Canyon View Homes, spoke in opposition to
the staff recommendations. Their company is currently funding the full cost of maintenance in this area.
It was their expectation that they would be combined or annexed into another open space maintenance
district which would have lowered the yearly assessment. They would like to continue subsidizing the
maintenance and carry the full cost until more of the units are sold and the homeowners can have an
election to see if they want to form a private association. They formally requested the delay of the
formation of the open space maintenance district for,a period of 6-8 months.
Mayor Pro Tempore Moore informed Mr. Kelton that if a private association was formed and did not
maintain at a certain level it would automatically revert to an open space maintenance district.
Minutes
July 23, 1991
Page 8
Councilman Rindone questioned whether notification was given to potential homeowners regarding the
possible imposition of an open space maintenance district.
Mr. Kelton responded that a notification form is signed with the contract and it is also contained in the DRE
White Paper,
Mr, Lippitt informed Coundl that ff the formation of the district was delayed, it would have to be for one
year, The assessment has to be set by August 6th, therefore it would have to be continued to next July,
Mr, Kalton stated the developer would be willing to continue the full cost subsidy for the maintenance until
an aleetion could be held by the homeowners or the one year review is held,
Councilman Maleolin questioned whether "H' Street had been designated as a scenic corridor, He felt the
seanit corridors were a benefit to the entire City and this was the first time that this burden was assessed
to such a small number of homeowners. During the time of continuance, staff should look at the question
of combining this area with Long Canyon or another district.
MS (Moore/Malcolm) to continue the formation of an open space m;Intenanee district for Canyon Views
to June 1992 to allow new homeowners to choose as to whether they want to form their own distrielL Staff
is to pursue the scenic route concept, and the developer is to continue covering all malntenanee costs.
Mr, Lippitt questioned whether the Coune~ wanted to form the district at this time and set a zero
assessment. This had been done in the past, the issue then is not whether the district should be formed but
what the assessment would be.
VOTE ON MOTION: approved 4-O-1 with Mayor Nader absent.
RESOLLrlION 16277 ESTABUSI-IING OPEN SPACE MAliCE DIb-i-KICT NUIViBER 24 -
CANYON VI~
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
a. Patrick Barajas0 375 'J' Street, Chula Vista, CA, complained of the residue from the SDG&E plant
and questioned what was being burned. He also questioned whether there was an ordinance con~olling
the use of leaf/grass blowers. He then noted the retirement of Chief Winters and hoped that the City would
hire someone that worked as well with the community.
Councilman Malcolm stated staff would give him the telephone of Pat Barnes, the representative for SDG&E.
Mayor Pro Tempore Moore requested that the City Attorney contact Mr. Barajas regarding the grass/leaf
blowers.
ACTION ~
14. REPORT ON ENDANGERED LISTING STATUS OF THE CALIFORNIA GNATCATCI-IF..R
AND CURRENT REGIONAL AND SUB-REGIONAL EFFORTS TO PREPARE A HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN
- The repor~ contains a review of the current status of the California Gnateateher as a state and federal
endangered species. Current programs by other agencies and groups which are proposing to preserve
sensitive biological habitat, and Chula Vista's options are also listed. Staff recommends Counc~ 1) authorize
Minutes
July 28, 1991
Page 9
the City Manager to send a letter to the California Fish and Game Commission regarding the potential listing
of the California Gnatcatcher as a candidate for state endangered species; and 2) direct staff to prepare a
habitat eonsexvation program for areas within the City containing sensitive biological habitat, including
coastal sage scrub habitat. (Director of planning)
City Attorney Boogaard requested that Council continue the report for one week.
MSC (Moore/Malcolm) to continue the report for one week to the meeting of July 30, 1991.
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
No items submitted.
hl~S pI..n].~n FROM THE CONSENT C_~t.I~NDAR
Items pulled: 6A, 6B, and 7. The minutes will reflect the published agenda order.
OTHER BUSINESS
15. GI-IY MANAGERS REPORTfS') - None
16. MAYORS REPORT(S)
a. Informed the public that there was a special meeting regarding a hazardous waste treatment plant
that is located by the Otay landfill (AbTech) at 7:00 p.m. on July 30th at the Valley Lindo School.
b. There will be a special meeting on Tuesday, July 30th, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers for
Rancho del Rey SPA IlL
17. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilman Moore
a. Discussion and potential action regarding SANDAG and approval of master plan for air-carrier
airport in Otay Mesa with City of San Diego as lead agency and application to Federal Aviation
Administration CFAA) for associated planning funds.
Mayor Pro Tempore Moore stated he would be the City representative at the meeting and questioned
whether there was input from his fellow Councilmembers.
Councilman Malcolm responded that he disagreed with Council actions in the past regarding the proposed
airport. He was in opposition of,the airport and the felt there ~ould be tremendous impacts upon the City
but also felt that the City should work with the City of San Diego in order to ensure that proper studies are
done regarding air, noise, traffic, etc. The City has not been included in any of the meetings held up to this
Minutes
JUly 23, 1991
Page 10
point and he felt it was d/rectly related to the position the City has taken in the past. Those that win work
within the rules and ensure that due process is done.
Mayor Pro Tempore Moore stated that the City did not have to roll over and play dead. His major concern
was that due process was not being done.
Coune~woman Grasser Horton
a. Stated she had been trying to obtain information from the different department heads regarding
consultants and the amount of money they have been paid in the past. To date, she has not fully received
the information requested. She requested that the information be broken down by the individual contracts.
MS (Grasser Hormn/Rindone) to direct the City Manager to provide for each consultant contract, even if
under the City Manager's purchasing authority, the following information: 1 ) area of expertise, deparUnent
involved, duties performed, on_going or special contract, date hired, contract renewal dates, time left on
conlracts ~nana-lal inrOrnlatiOll~ Le. hourly wage, mn~'im~Inl contt'act alnoullt~ how much paid to date, how
much to be paid in future, what fiscal year it was budgeted, if the contract is developer reimbursed, and
justification of hiring a consultant over hiring an employee for the same service. The report is to be brought
back as an 'Action Item' on the August 6th aganda.
Mayor Pro Tempore Moore stated there was a rule-of-thumb that all requests requiring excessive staff time
be brought to Council for approval.
Councilman Rindone inquired what the difference was in this request from his request at the Thursday
meeting.
Assistant City Manager Morris responded that Councilman Rindone had requested a similar report and that
the report to be brought back on August 6th woUld address both their concerns.
VOTE ON MOTION: approved 4-0-1 with Mayor Nader absent.
ADJOURNMF2qT
ADJOURNMENT AT 8:14 P.M. to the Regular City Council Meeting/Worksession on Thursday, JUly 25, 1991
at 4:00 p.m. in the City Council Conference Room.
Respectfully submitted,
BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CMC, City Clerk
by: VickTC. Soderqui~t, Deputy City ~