HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1991/09/17 MIMJIES OF A REGULAR lV!F~-rLnlG OF THE
~-lY OF CHULA VISTA
Tuesday, September 17, 1991 Councfi Chambers
6:09 p.m. Public Services Building
C. at ll~n TO ORDER
1. ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: Councilmembers Grasser Honon, Malcolm, Moore, RAndone, and Mayor Nader.
ALSO PRESENT: John D. Goss, City Manager; Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney; and Beverly A.
Authelet, City Clerk
2. pl .RnGE OF AI J-EGIANCE TO THE FLAG. SII.RNT PRAYER
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: August 28, September 3 and September 10, 1991
MSC (Moore/Malcolm) to approve minutes of August 2.8, September 3 and 10, 19{)1 as presented. Minu~es
of August 28, 1~91 approved 5-0. Minutes of September 3, 1991 approved 4-0-0-1, with Coundlwom~n
Grasser Honon abs~inlng, Minutes of September 10, 1~1 approved 4-0~-1, with Mayor Nader abstaining.
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY: None submitted.
CONSENT C~I ~-NDAR
(Items pulled 6 & 9)
BALANCE OF CONSFAN7 C~I ~NDAR OFFERED BY MAYOR NADER, re~din~ of the te~ was waived, passed
and approved unanimously.
5. WRI riP21 COMMUNICATIONS:
a. Requesttoc~nsideratraffic~i~entatthe~ff.ramp~f~8~5S~uthandMainSweetbyway~fam~
3n31ysis to include placement of speed limit signs and school crossing signs - Mr. and Mrs. Wffiiarn F. Speir,
1453 Oleander Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91911. It is recommended that Mr. and Mrs. SpeLes letter be
received and filed and that staff inform the Speirs about the status of the project. (15090)
b. Requestt~supporLNari~na~City~se~rtst~haveCa~Trans~nsm~ctanew~r~mPf~r~azaBonita
from 1-805 North - Charles G. Peter, 435 Stoneridge Court, Bonita, CA 91902. It is recommended that the
Councfi express their support for National City:s efforts and that staff be directed to prepare a letter for the
Mayoz~s signanire to CalTrans in support of This proposal. (15092)
c. Request to be advised of actions being considered and/or recomm~sllded by the City Of Chula Vista
regarding Appropriate Technologies 11, Incorporated (APTIiC ID permit renewal - Jerry W. McNutt, 522
Tallow Court, Chula Vista, CA 91911. It is recommended that Mr. McNutt be advised of staffs intent and
notified of when the item will be considered. (15091)
Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 2
d. Claim~ again~t the City * Claimant No. 1 & 2: Claudia Angeles, Joyce Nicolas, c/o Beverly Hagins-
Marshall, Esq., 45 Third Ave., Ste. 201, Chula Vista, CA 91910; Claimant No. 3: Merltplan Insurance
Company, as Subrogee for Teodoro Fresgoso Appel, P.O. Box 19702, Irvine, CA 92713-1606; Claimant No.
4: Marguerite Wffiiams, c/o Law Offices of Grayson & Grayson, 10880 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 2121, Los
Angeles, CA. 90014; and, Claimant No. 5: Ronald J. Whitehunt, c./o David S. Robbin, Esq., Lowell &
Robbin, Attorneys at Law, 707 Broadway, 17th Floor, San Diego, CA. 92101-5311. It is recommended that
the claims be denied. (15093)
6. ORDINANCE 2477 ESTABLISHING A SPE{2AL ~ RATE AREA FOR THE WOODCREST
TERRA NOVA SUBD~SION (second readin~ and adon~on) - The ordinance establishes a special sewer
service rate area to provide for City costs associated with maintenance and operation of a sewer pump
station serving the Woodcrest Tetra Nova Subdivision. Staff recommends Council place ordinance on second
reading and adoption. (Director of Public Works) Pulled from the Consent Calendar. (15094)
Councilman Malcolm stated that this subdivision was located down the sweet from his home and even
though it did not have an effect on him he wanted to know if this had been done before.
Cliff Swanson, Deputy Director of Public Works, answered that six other developments had similar sewage
systems. The estimated cost to maintain a pump station was $7,500 per year with an assumed 5% inflation
rate each year. Staff had requested that the developer disclose that information to the buyer so the buyer
had an option to buy the pump.
Councilman Moore asked staff why they had not, in this case, put the burden back on the developer.
John Lippin, Director of Public Works, stated that the City sold the land to the developer. It had been
decided that if the area to the north were ever developed a sewer could be put in to relieve the pump
station. Right now it was considered cost prohibitive to build a sewer to Bonita Road so a pump station had
been put in and this ordinance set up to charge for that. Mr. Lippitt said that at this point he thought they
would need to check with the City Aaomey to fred out if they could fall back at this time, but did think that
a policy on pump stations was needed.
City Attorney Boogaard stated he would need more time if a legal opinion were needed.
ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE 2477 W~ OFFERED BY COUNCILMAN MALCOLM, reading oftex~was waived,
passed and approved unanimously.
MSUC (Makolm/Moore) to direct staff to develop a policy on putnp stations and l~ommp~ld~rio~ on
whether sewer districts should be allowed.
MSUC CNadar/Moore) to continue meeting with Item 9 btt~ rprnalnder of aganda itpm-~ to be postponed until
next week.
7. ORDINANCE 2478 REZONING CERT.adI~I TERRITORYG~YBONDED BYMAIN~I'RF. ET
TO/HE NORTH, BROADWAY (BEYER BOULEVARD) TO THE F/ST, FAIVRE STR~r TO THE SOUTH, ~
27TH b-tHEET TO THE WEST (/k.ekS1_exC, ORS pAR~R-t_ NllMBERS 6294M0-01 AND 629-010-01 ) FROM THEIR
U-iY-ADOFfED COUNTY ZONE CLASSIFICATION C-37 TO u-iY ClASSIFiCATION C-T-P AND TO (]-IANGE
THE ZONING {3ASSIFICATION FROM R- 1 TO C-C-P FOR APPROXIMATELY 3.65 A(IES OF LAND LOCAFr, D
AT THE SOLrfHEAST CORNER OF EAST H ~-i KEET AND OTAY LARES ROAD (second readir~ and adonlion]
- Staff recommends Council place ordinance on second reading and adoption. (Director of Planning)
(15095)
17, ~
Page 3
8. RESOLUTION 16325 APPROVING AN AGI~RRMENT W]TH CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION FOR 1-80S AND 'F~J~-GRAPH CANYON ROAD INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS AND
APPROPRIATING $338,000 TI-IEREFOR - On 7/24/90, Council approved Resolution 15735 expressing
willingness to fund the City's portion of the cost for Phase I of 1-805 and Telegraph Canyon Road interchange
improvements. This action was necessary to enable CalTrans to complete their project repor~ and obtain
State funding approval. The project report is completed end CalTrans is now prepared to proceed with the
project. The total cost for the proposed project is $594,000. The City's share of the total cost is $297,000.
The subject project is identLfied in the Cites Transportation DIF Program. Sufficient funds are available to
cover the Cites share of the cost. Staff recomlnends approval of the resolution and appropria~lg $338,000
from the unappropriated balance of the Transportation DIF Account. (Director of Public Works) 4/5's vote
required. Continued from the meeting of 8/20/91. (150963
9.A. RESOLUTION 16343 DEtlARING INTENTION TO ORDER THE INSTALLATION OF CERTAIN
IMPROVEMENTS IN A PROPOSED ASS~ DISTRICT; DECLARING THE WORK TO BE OF MORE
THAN LOCAL OR ORDINARY BENEFIT; DESCRIBING THE DISTRICT TO BE ,a,SSESSED TO PAY THE COSTS
AND EXPENSES THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUAN(2~ OF BONDS FOR ASSESSMENT DI:~rl RICT
NUMBER 90-1 (SALT CRRRIC D - On 7/23/91, Council accepted the property owner petition for the initiation
of acquisition assessment district proceedings, pursuant to the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913, for the
financing of certain public improvements serving the Salt Creek I, located at the intersection of East
Street and SR-125 in the Eastlake development. This item continues the formal proceedings leading to the
establishment of the Salt Creek I assessment district. Staff recommends approval of the resolution and that
Council set the date and time of the public hearing for Ocwber 22, 1991 at 6:00 p.m. (Director of Public
Works) Pulled from the Consent Calendar. (15097)
B. RESOLUTION 16344 PASSING ON THE 'REPORT* OF THE ENGINERIL GIVING pRRI~lVlINARy
APPROVAL, AND ~h-fflNG A TLME AND PLACE FOR PUBLIC HEARING (15098)
RESOLUTIONS 16343 AND 16344 OFFERED BY COUNCUJ~uN RINDONE, reading of the text was waived,
passed and approved u~animously.
10. RESOLUTION 16345 APPROVING SI~i iLEMENT AG~RRMENT, RRI~SE AND MODWICATION
WITH CHULA VISTA CABLE AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID A~- The
purpose of the settlement agreement is to resolve two ongoing issues with Chula Vista Cable: 1) past due
franchise fee payments to the City, and 2) responsibility for possessory interest taxes levied by the County.
Staffrecommends approval of the resolution. (Directorof Finance) Continued from the meeting ofg/10/91.
(15099)
11. RESOLUTION 16346 APPROVINGGRANT APPLICATION FOR SAN DIEGO COUNTYS RFLYr]ING
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM - Grant application is for the expansion and new development of
commercial and industrial recycling programs in the City. Staff recommends approval of the resolution.
(City Manager) (15100)
* * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * *
PUBLIC ~GS AND J~RIATED RESOLIrHONS AND ORDINANC-~5:
None submitted.
Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 4
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
a. Alex Galchenko, 1358 Galentie Loop, Chula Vista, CA, stated that he had a grievance against the City
Council for a resolution dating back to August of 1989. In February 1989 he and lagrid Galchenko had
bought two lots on Parkway, about 100yards this side ofBroadway for approximately $200,000. Their plans
had been to build eight affordable homing units to rent out during their retirement years. When they went
to the Planning Commission they were told that the density had been downgraded. The lots are 50, x 130'
adjoining, which makes it 6500 square feet, .15 units per acre, when translated made it less than one unit
per lot. They are now running a negative cash flow on the property and would lose approximately $60,000
if they tried to sell the property now. He stated that he did not think it was the job of the City government
to devaluate property by rezoning. (15101)
Councilman Malcolm said that the City had recently reviewed certain portions of the general plan and asked
Mr. Leiter if that area of Parkway between 5th and Broadway would be included in the review.
Robert Leiter, Director of Planning, answered that he would have to check but believed that was one of the
study areas they were planning to review and evaluate for rezoning consistency in the next year. They had
already dealt with one area, had another in process and there were two more scheduled to be evaluated.
He stated that the City would initiate those zoning reviews and the property owner would not need to file
an application or incur any cost involved in that processing.
Councilman Malcolm explained to Mr. Galchenko that when the density had been reduced in the western
portion of Chula Vista, it had been discovered that mistakes had been made in some areas. Some areas had
already been reviewed and when they got to Mr. Galchenko's area the City would notify him in writing of
their decision to either conELfin or rescind the actions taken in 1989. Councilman Malcolm said that he
hoped Mr. Galchenko would participate when this item comes up at the Planning Commission level and at
the Council level.
b. James W. Morgan, 3453 University Ave., San Diego, CA claimed that a park employee dumped trash
into his pick up truck and that park employees were told by the City that Mr. Morgan was violating the law
by dumping trash into the trash barrels in the J Street parking lot. Mr. Morgan was issued a ticket for
refuse disposal on private property by a Chula Vista police officer. Mr. Morgan stated that he had thought
about bringing a bag of the trash to the Counc~ Meeting and dumping it on the floor. He claimed that he
was on the City Attorne3/s "hit list" and said he would be attending next week's Counc~ meeting.
(15102 & 15103)
MSUC (Malcolm/Nader) to refer this matter to the City Attorney.
ACTION ITEMS
12. RESOLUTION 16347 AMENDING FISCAL YEAR 1991-92 BUDGET AND PROVIDING FOR THE
APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS FOR SALARY, FRINGE BENEFITS INCREASE AND OTHER IIRIATED ITEMS -
When the Fiscal Year 1991-92 budget was approved by Council, there remained many questions regarding
the impact of the State's budget. That impact has largely, although not completely, been determined and
it is requested that Council amend the budget to include the correct amounts for salary and benefit changes,
other miscellaneous amendments and, as requested, return to the 'Wish List" to determine if any items
should be included in the amendment. In addition, the Council approved salary increase of 5% for all
employees must be appropriated. As a result of these adjustments, it is recommended that the originally
approved budget of $49,359,449 be increased to $50,604,992. There are sufficient estimated revenues to
balance this proposed budget. Staff recommends adoption of the resolution amending fiscal year 1991-92
budget. (City Manager) 4/S's vote required. (15104)
Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 5
City Manager Goss stated that the following were being presented to Council as part of the 'Wish List' to
find out if any should be included in an amendment to the resolution:
1. Parks & Recreation staffing at afterschool programs $7,259*
2. Personnel Technician $33,000*
3. Cultural Arts Coordinator $39,000*
*revised cost for 10/1/91 to 6/30/92
City Manager Goss stated that sta~ was in support of #1 and #2, and that #3 was really a program
expansion over a three-year period and that timdrag was available for at least the first year, after that the
person would try to obtain grants, etc.
RESOLUTION 16347 WAS OI~ERED BY COUNC~n ~ MALCOLM, reading of text was waived, passed and
approved unanimously.
MSUC (Rindone/Malcolm) to amend Resolution 16347 to inducle #1 and #2 on 'W'uh List.'
Motion: (Nader) to add #3 according to the City Managers recornme:ldation that fulld~ was ava~able.
Motion failed due to lack of a seconcL
13. REPORT CHULA VISTA COMMUNFrY YOLrFH CENT~J. - ConslTuction of the youth center
is expected to be completed in early October 1991. This report provides an overview of the Department's
analysis of two possible options in determining how the community youth center at Chula Vista High School
could be managed and operated. Staff recommends that the City Council accept Option Number One
whereby the City would operate the facility in cooperation with the Sweetwater School District. Other
providers including, but not limited to, the Boys and Girls Club and the YMCA, would be allowed to offer
programs as space availability and time permits end would share in the proportionate cost of utilizing the
facility. (Director of Parks and Recreation) (15105)~
City Manager Goss stated that staff went into great detail to provide the Council with as much information
as possible on the two options. In option one, Parks and Recreation Department would operate the Youth
Center joinfly with the Sweetwater School District and the Center would be available to the Boys & Girls
Club and the YMCA. In option two, the Boys & Girls Club would operate the facility in cooperation with
the Sweetwater School District. By way of historical background this started with the demolition of the City
facility the Boys & Girls Club ran at 5th and 'I' Street and the expansion of the Chula Vista shopping center.
Part of the funding for the new facility was obtained because of the remodeling of the shopping center. The
developer did provide some of the money that led to the construction of the new Youth Center. Additional
funds obtained from other sources also went for that purpose. At that time, there was definite direction on
the part of the Council that a major use of the new facility would be by the Boys & Girls Club. It was also
equally clear that exclusive use was not directed in that particular action. It was identified as a 'community'
youth center not just a youth center. There had also been concerns expressed about the maintenance and
programming. This is a City facility built on school disttict property. The facility is valuable and staff went
to see it maintained. Another issue was programming and staffs view was that several activities offered by
different organizations could co-exist and provide opportunity for a larger focus group. The facility is larger
than originally contemplated and therefore capable of more prograrn~. Some kind of shared use needs to
be worked out.
MS (Moore/Malcolm) to rder this back to the staff and direa the City Manager to assemble mnnhen from
the three organi~tious (City Staff, Parks & liecreation and the Boys & Girls Club3, come to a coIxse~s~, iron
out all the wrinkles, cross the *fs*, dot the *fs*, no matter who runs it and then bring it back to Council.
Councilman Malcolm stated that several years ago he had made it clear that since money had been received
from the Boys Club that there was a moral obligation and he believed that money was in the million do]lar
September 17, 1991
Page 6
range. He felt a commitment was made then. He stated that he would like to see a contract with the Boys
& Girls Club that would mandate a class A maintenance condition, certain programs and review possibly on
an armual basis. He thought the City Attorney could draw up a contract that the Boys & Girls Club would
agree to and fulfill. He would help them, as a Councilmember, to make sure that monies were available for
children in the program. A contract should alleviate concerns by the commmtity on whether the Boys &
Girls Club could fulfill their promises, which he believed they could and would do.
Councilman Moore stated that the Parks & Recreation Commission had a strong interest in this and they had
made recommendations, the community-at-large had made recommendations, the Club had submitred what
they could and would do and other things could be negotiated. The decision should not be based on
whether it would cost the City more or less money because the City had not put the full cost together yet.
Those decisions should be made at another time. He also stated that there was a motion on the floor and
there should be a vote before any public comments.
Councilwoman Grasser Horton asked if the motion on the floor could be held until after the public
corfinlents.
Cotwcnm~q Moore withdrew his motion and Counciinmn Malcolm hi~ ~e~ond.
Councilman Rindone stated he thought that Councilmen Moore and Malcolm were trying to bring into
proper light what the commitment was by the City Council in 1987. What he thought he heard indicated
was that this should be referred hack to staff, that staff and the Boys & Girls Club come up with a proposed
contract written by the City Attorney for shared responsibility and addressing all the other issues, including
the $5 million liability, funding of equipment, etc. He stated that option was not before them at that time.
He thought the thing that was most difficult was that everyone had been pleased with the efforts of the Boys
& Girls Club and Parks & Recreation through the years as two of the finest organizations to serve youth in
this community. The issue was the commitment the Council gave in 1987, following that intent to provide
a shared responsibility, and a contract. If that could be proposed then the Council had that responsibility.
Councilman Malcolm stated that the majority of those signed up to speak he had either already spoken to,
read their minutes, or in some other way already knew basically what they were going to say. He also stated
that he did not think anything was set in concrete. The Boys & Girls Club would be the prime user as long
as they used it, it would be a joint operation.
Mayor Nader stated he thought Council needed to give specific direction as to what was meant by a joint
operation.
Russ Hall, 235 K St., Chula Vista, CA, said he was chairman of the Parks & Recreation Commission. Mr. Hall
spoke in favor of staff recommendation stating that the facility should be shared because there was a
shortage of facility space in the City. He said the Commission would be willing to assist in making that
possible.
Sam Watts, 1334 Ridgeview Way, Bonka, CA, representing Parkway Recreation Center, stated that she was
in favor of a combined facility and agreed with staff recommendation.
Maggie Halton, 162 Mankato St., Chula Vista, CA, representing the Parks & Recreation Commission, spoke
in favor of staff recommendation stating that she was in favor of a coordinated, City-supervised, community
youth facility.
Councilman Malcolm asked Robert Fox what the membership cost was for the Boys & Girls Club.
Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 7
Mr. Fox answered that it was $15 per year but they do provide scholarships for ch~dren that could not
afford the cost. He stated that no ch~d was turned away from getting a scholarship.
W. Scott Mosher, 909 Loma View, Chula Vista, CA, Executive Director of the Boys & Girls Club of Chula
Vista, spoke in opposition of staff recommendation. He stated that they wanted to operate the new youth
facility and coordinate the use when they weren't using it. The Boys & Girls Club thought there had been
an intent that they were going to be the prime user of the fac~ity. Mr. Mosher said that City staff and
Counc~ had been very supportive toward the Boys & Girls Club. The Boys & Girls Club provide a variety
of programs for the community's youth.
Mayor Nader said that he understood that during certain hours the Boys & Girls Club would be the exclusive
users and during others hours, including weekends, late evenings and school hours, that the City or other
organizations would use the facility.
Mr. Mosher stated that they were not n'ying to be exclusive when they said they needed use of the fac~ity
at certain times. There was a need to expand services to serve more ch~dren and they were at maximum
capacity where they were.
Mayor Nader asked Mr. Mosher if Counc~ directed staff to negotiate a contract with the Boys & Girls Club
that gave the Club management of the facility during the programming hours requested by the Boys & Girls
Club and at the same time allowed the City, or its designee, to operate the facility at other times, contained
some specific conlzactual assurances concerning maintenance, supervision, quality of personnel, etc.,
provided for annual reviews with an option for the City to cancel the contract if on review the terms did not
appear to be met to the Ciry~s satisfaction, would he have any problem with that motion.
Mr. Mosher stated that they would have no problem with that motion.
Councilman Rindone stated both organizations were highly thought of and the individuals within eacti'
organization had been outstanding leaders of the community and had always acted in the best interest of
the community serving its youth. He asked if the intent was exclusive use by the Boys & Girls Club, Monday
through Friday from 2:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. and allowed shared use at other times?
Mr. Mosher answered basically yes. There would be times when others would be allowed to use the facility
during those hours though.
Mayor Nader asked if there would be a problem in including in the contract that if the Boys & Girls Club
were not substantially occupying all of that fac~ity then the City could utilize the facility during those hours.
Mr. Mosher answered that if they were not fully utilizing the facility then they would look to the City or
other organizations to do that.
Councilman Pindone stated that in the Parks & Recreation Commission proposal they indicated $25,600 for
start up costs and equipment, but in the Boys & Girls Club proposal the amount was $100 for new
equipment. He said that was quite a difference and asked Mr. Mosher to share his thoughts on this.
Mr. Mosher stated they had set aside $15,000 for start up costs and those funds were readfly antiable.
Councilman Malcolm asked how chtidren were informed there were scholarships antiable?
Mr. Mosher answered that it was stated on most of their written materials. He reiterated that no child is
turned away and said that some children earn their membership by helping out at the Club.
Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 8
John Wffiett, 97 Montehello St., Chula Vista, CA, a member of the Parks & Recreation Commission, spoke
in favor of the staff recommendation.
Michael Roark, 231 4th Ave., Chula Vista, CA, spoke as a citizen in support of the Boys & Girls Club of Chula
Vista. Mr. Roark was in opposition of staff recommendation and stated that a contract should be drawn up
between the City and the Boys & Girls Club.
5onnie Lougblin, 230-D Regency Ct.; Chula Vista, CA, spoke in opposition of staff recommendation. She
stated that the Boys & Girls Club provided a positive role model to the children as well as having fine
programs. She presented the Councfi with a signed petition.
Pauline Madden, 273 'L' St., Chula Vista, CA, spoke in opposition of the staff recommendation and highly
recommended the Boys & Girls Club.
Bill Teichman, 1530 Greenbay St., San Diego, CA, spoke in opposition of the staff recommendation. Mr.
Teichman stated that the new facility should be for youth and there should be no adult programs.
Ben Richardson, 555 Broadway, Ste. 1019, Chula Vista, CA, spoke in opposition of the staff recommendation.
He asked Councfi to look at the minutes of the June 1987 Council Meeting and stated that the Boys & Girls
Club could maintain the facility.
Mayor Nader stated that he wanted to make sure no child would be turned away for lack of funds.
MSUC (Malcolm/Nader) to direct staff to negotiate and bring back a conn-act whereby the Boys & Girls Club
would be the lead agency for the facility and proper safeguards be included that had been pointed out by
the Coun~lmenlbers, including m~intenance and proper review periods, and giving the Boys & Girls Club
the hours of use they requesteeL
Councilman Moore stated that the goal would be to reach an agreement to include elements in maintenance,
hours and days of operation, programs, potential for other users and a liaison between the primary users,
the Club and the City. He stated that if agreeable with both Councfiman Malcolm and Mayor Nader, he
would like to see those included in the motion. The result shotrid be an excellent contract.
Mayor Nader called a recess at 8:18 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 8:33 p.m.
14. RFJ~RT COUNCIL STAFF/L~;SISTANCE - The Council will be called upon to evaluate and
deliberate on the issues associated with creating Council staff assistant positions ('Council Staff'), and, as
the Council deems appropriate, to implement certain ordinances and resolutions that will achieve such
purpose. (Deputy City Manager Thomson/City Attorney) 4/5's vote required. (15106)
Councilman Malcolm stated he was opposed to staffing for council and to not having a staff recommendation
on this item. The Charter had given the City Council certain rights as to what they can and can't do.
Councfi staffing ean enter the Counc~ into a whole new set of politics. During budget time it was said if
there were additional staffing it would go through the personnel deparUnent. This should be brought up
during budget time next year when there would be competition against other programs and the public would
have input. This should be referred to the Charter Review Committee prior to Counc~ action for their input,
as well as any other appropriate City of Chula Vista committee.
Mayor Nader stated he recalled that this had been brought up during the budget process. It had been
determined unacceptable by Council and Conncfi directed staff to bring it back after the budget process and
that is what happened. He said the function of the Charter Review Committee was to recommend proposed
changes or revisions to the Charter not to judge whether something complies with the Charter.
Minula~
September 17, 1991
Page 9
Councilman Malcolm stated that because of the change in direction he would not mind the Charter Review
Committee and the Board of Ethics both looking at this.
Motion: (Malcolm) to refer this to the Charter Review Cornmitt~ee and the Board of Ethics for lcvlew and
xt. port hack and that there be a staff fecommendatioIL Motion failed for lack of a second.
Mayor Nader stated that after appropriate staff were adopted he would have no opposition to asking the
Board of Ethics to give any recommendation they might have as to what is, in their view, ethical about use
of staff. He said he did not want to delay this item further and thought a full time assistant to the Mayor
and par~ time assistants to the Council would be appropriate.
Councilman Kindone stated that the Council needed to provide the best possible service to their constituents.
He stated that he favored the small staff of constituent assistants on a limited and perhaps trial basis.
Councilman Malcolm asked what the person would do that staff had not been providing.
Councilman Rindone said that on page 14-11 under 2.C it stated "...the functions of constituent relations, ,
representing Councilmembers at community meetings, possibly assisting in the development of policy
proposals, and other related duties." This would be a small step to allow access to constituents. Under that
proposal it would be a maximum of .25 constituent non-administtative staff on an hourly basis, fringe
benefits, unclassified up to a maximum of 500 hours. He stated that he thought this was a realistic and
viable step toward that direction. If a Councilmember chose not to utilize that, it would be their choice.
But he thought that this Would be an opportunity to allow constituents to dialogue with Councilmembers
or other mediate constituent staff.
Councilman Malcolm stated that this could turn into possible abuse and would rather ask for help from the
City Manager.
Mayor Nader stated that there were critical issues facing the City fight now that required a great deal of his
time. The difficulties being experienced were the fault of a system that is out moded. With a larger
constituency now and a full plate of issues, the person hired would have plenty of legitimate work to do.
He said there was a fundamental difference between the function of the appointed administrative official
and the elected official. At times the assistance from the City Manager's office was not what he, as an
elected official might need. The full time position would have three rasponsib~ities: 1) administer the
council office; 2) assist the mayor; and, 3) serve as back up for overflow with the other 1/4 time positions
for the Council. He asked the City Attorney why the assistant to the Mayor, to be appointed by the City
Manger, required a 3/5's vote, but the assistants to the Council, appointed by the City Manager, required
a 4/5's vote? He asked why the majority of the Council could not do the same thing for the Council as for
the Mayor.
City Attorney Boogaard stated that he thought the Mayor was focusing on Ordinances 1B, 2C, 2B and 2C
which created a council department with a 3/Sth's vote. The contract position, second alternative, could
occur because it ~,vas a contract and no positions were being created. When a position is created it requires
a budgetary amendment. He stated 2D would be contract staff and ff the Council were going to consider
a 2D contract staff position, it had to be determined ff there were sufficient funds or ff an appropriation were
required.
Jim Thomson, Deputy City Manager, stated the answer would depend on how the full time position were
handled. If there would still be a full time position in some capacity then he thought there would be a
ftmdmg problem and probably had to go back to an appropriation issue.
Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 10
Motion: (Nader) to accept Alternative 1C and 2D for 4 coreract positions through the City Managers office.
To include supervising the operation of the Mayor and Council office; assist the Maygg and, serve as backup
for overflow with the other 1/4 time positions for the Council. Motion riffled for lack of a second,
MS ~indone/Grasser Hotton) to accept 2C, Ordinance 1B that requires a 3/Sth's vote to estobli~h the
Department of Mayor and City Council and come back to Council in 30 days with a resolution This would
provide staRIs qHo for the ~llor Yjianagenlent As.sistant p0iitioll, no rhange Other than filling it pexmanen~y
with the current job description and up to a mnx~m~in of X/4 time or 10 hours per week, or a maximum
of 500 houn an an unel~ui~ed hourly scale per Coune~lm~mher.
Amandmant to motion: (Rindone) to state that in addition to the existing ori~nal position, ere~tlng 5
undassi~ed 1/4 time council positions without creating a depaO-.~t.
City Attorney Boogaard stated that on page 14-25, there was an Alternate 2C resolution which if amended
to leave in the second to the last paragraph and in the fourth paragraph swike out "the new deparunent of,"
would work.
MS (GFasser Hor~on/Nader) to amend the resolution to state that in the event that a Councilperson declln~
the priv~ege of a Council assistant the City Manager bad the authority to reallocate the 1/4 position to the
Mayors assistant, Motion failed 2-3 with Malcolm, Moore and Rindone opposed,
RESOLLrrlON 16348D WAS OFI2F_J~ BY MAYOR NADER, reading of the tex~ was waived.
MSC (Rindone/Grasser Hotton) to accept Resolution 16348D as amended, Approved 4-1 with CoHncfimsn
Malcolm opposed.
15. REPORT LrFILITY UNDERGROUND CONVERSION FOR FIFIH AVENUE BETWEEN 'L' AND
NAPLES ~rtF. KETS - On September 10, 1991 the City Council directed staff to prepare a report on the
undergrounding of utilities on Fifth Avenue between 'L' and Naples Streets. This report also addresses the
next phase of Fifth Avenue between Naples Street and Orange Avenue. The plans on this project are nearing
completion and staff is working with the utility companies on the relocation plans. Staff recommends that
Council accept the report. (Director of Public Works) (15107)
MSLIC (Malcolm/Moore) to accept the report.
Councilman Rindone suggested that the list be prioritized and evaluated as to how the streets could be
upgraded and make a major effort to start undergrounding.
Cliff Swanson, Deputy Director of Public Works, stated they would be coming back to Council in the near
future to address the remaining phases.
John Lippitt, Director of Public Works, stated there would not be additional costs for the remaining phases.
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMFANDATIONS
16. REPORT ENVIRONMENTAL AGE/qDA FOR THE 9(rS - Beginning in August of 1990 the
Resource Conservation Commission considered the "Environmental Agenda for the 90's' as submitted by
Mayor Nader, who was Councilman Nader at the time. The August meeting was conducted as a public
hearing with input from the development community and the Sierra Club. There are 57 items to the agenda0
each including Mayor Nader's proposal and the Commission's recommendation. Recommendation is for
$eptnaher 17, 1991
Page 11
Council to adopt the 57 item "Environmental Agenda for the 90's" as amended by the Commission.
(Chairman of the Resource Conservation Commission) (15108)
Councilman Malcolm stated that he did not like to see items on the agenda without staff recommendations.
He said the City Manager had stated that he had not had enough time to review all the items and was not
able to make a recommendation. A number of these items had already been done and he wanted to see the
others cut down.
Mayor Nader stated he had been working on a memo to divide the items into small categories for
consideration rather than trying to deal with all of them at one time and would try to have that memo ready
for the next meeting. He said there were two items he thought should be dealt with and they were number
40 and 41.
MSUC (Nader/Moore) to approve #a,O *Counul to umd appropriate letten in sent~neln~ ~in~
involving ~egal drug activity in Claula 1rlsUl, ~.-..inding judge~ of tile seriousness of thil a~Gvlty and the
need for protecting the public' and #41 'Council to send appropriate letten in senteneln~ proceedings
involving illegal drug activity in Chula Vista, rnnlnding judges of the seriousnees of thi_~ adlvlty and the
need for protecting the public.*
Mayor Nader stated that #7 was time sensitive because APCD and SANDAG were in the process of preparing
a compliance plan. Chula Vista is curren~y a non-attainment region under the Federal Premier Act. He
stated he had some concerns with the environmental ethics of that approach and with the economic
consequence of it. Those approaches would require a series of mandatory measures to be imposed on
employers with a large number of employees to penalize employees for driving to work. It doesn't
automatically provide any alternatives. He suggested staff develop an option for Council's consideration to
include a sunset clause in the event APCD or SANDAG preempts the existing authority in this area and that
the ordinance developed give large employers a number'of options which they could choose from.
Councilman Malcolm stated that he did not want to vote on the remaining items without Chamber of
Commerce or staff input. He stated that he felt this was a regional problem.
MSLIC (Moore/Nader) to formulate concerns with a letter to APCD and SP, NDAG regardin~ #7 *A
Transportation D~m~nd Management Ordinance.*
Mayor Nader stated that the balance of the Environmental Agenda items should be trailed until the next
meeting and he'd try to finish the memo putting the items into categories.
MS (Moore/Grasser Horton) to forward the ra*malning SO+ items to the City Manage~ for review and
cornrnents including, but not limited to, fiscal impact and sl~ang cornmilnlent and return to Council within
Amendment to motion: (Rindone) to offer an amendment to the above motion to review only up to 6 items
MS (Moore/Grasser Horton) direct the City Managers office to work with Council on how it should be
MOTIONS AND SECONDS WITHDRAWN.
rl-~vlS pLIIJ.Rr~ FROM THE CONSENT CP, IJ~NDAR
Items pulled: 6 & 9. The minutes will reflect the published agenda order.
Minutes
September 17, 1991
Page 12
OTHER BUSINESS
17. CITY MANAGERS REPORT(S) - None.
18. MAYORS REPORT(S) - None.
19. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Cotmd mnn Rindone: Request to expand the after school recreational program at .three additional
sites with a second recreational aide at a cost of $7,260 from september 1, 1991 to June 30, 1992.
Continued from the m~eting of 8/27/91. This item was approved under Item
CotlDeflrnsvl Moore: Courlcil consideration to appoint nominees w the Mob~ehome Rent Review
Commission by either a nominee from each individual Councilmember or by a Council interview process.
The rationale for this is that this is an unusual Review board and the action of this Commission would not
be appealable. Continued to 9/'24/91.
ADJOURNMENT
The City Council met in closed session at 10:38 p.m. to discuss:
Pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - White versus City of Chula Vista
Potential disposition of Redevelopment Agency-owned properties in the Bayfront Project Area
(Assessor's Parcel Numbers 567-010-4, 567-010-18, 567-010-19, 565-310-9, and S65-310-25)
pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8
ADJO~ at 11:00 prn to the Regular City Council Meeting on September 24, 1991 at 6:00 p.m. in
the City Council Chambers.
Respectfully submitted,
BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CMC, City Clerk