Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1992/02/18 MINIJTF~ OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA Tuesday, February 18, 1992 Council Chambers 6:05 p.m. Public Services Building C~I.T.ED TO ORDER 1. CALL THE ROLL: PRESENT: Councilmembers Grasser Horton, Malcolm, Moore, Rindone, and Mayor Nader ALSO PRESENT: John D. Goss, City Manager; Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attomey; and Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk 2. PLEDGE OF ,a,I.1.1~G]ANCE TO THE FLAG, SILKNT PRAYER 3. APPROVAL OF MINlrI~S: February 4, 1992 MSUC (Moore/Nader) to approve the minutes of February 4, 1992 as amended to reflect Mayor Nader's ~ote as "yes" on the Consent Calendar. 4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY: a. Presentation of plaque from the National US/Mexico Sister Cities Association to the Chula Vista Irapuato Sister City Commission for third place in the nation -- a merit for outstanding programs and participation in 1991. Chair Teri Thomas presented the plaque to Council. Mayor Nader expressed congratulations to the Commission for the award. b. Presentation of a Japanese umbrella, Odawara lantern, tapestry, and other items from our Sister City Odawara, Japan, to the City of Chula Vista donated by Mrs. Doris Cox, Emeritus member of the International Friendship Commission. Also, a presentation of a certificate of appreciation to Mrs. Cox~ In recognition of the donation, Mayor Pro Tempore Malcolm presented Mrs. Cox with a certificate of appreciation. Mayor Nader thanked Mrs. Cox for her service on the International Friendship Commission. Mrs. Thomas stated that Mrs. Cox had served two full and highly successful tens on the Chula Vista International Friendship Commission and served as an outstanding leader in the community to bring people together. The International Friendship Commission elected Mrs. Cox Commissioner Emeritus because they highly respected all the things that she had done for the City. c. Oath of Office: Design Review Committee - Alex Galchenko; International Friendship Commission - Gabriela Canan Oath of Office was administered by City Clerk Authelet, certificates of appointment were presented by Mayor Pro Tempore Malcolm. Minutes February 18, 1992 Page 2 d. Presentation of Award Plaque for design of Memorial Park. John Goss, City Manager, stated that the City of Chula Vista had received an achievement award for outstanding park design from the California Parks and Recreation Society, District X]I, for the design of Memorial Park. CONSENT C~I.RNDAR (Items Pulled: Sa, 7, 9, 10, and 12) BALANCE OF CONSENT Cd, I .F. NDAR OFFERED BY MAYOR NADER, reading of the text was waived. passed and approved unanimously. 5. WRiTt't~I COMMUNICATIONS: a. Letter requesting installation of traffic signal at Otay Lakes Road and Gotham Street - Thomas A. Davis, 1657 Gotham Street, Chula Vista, CA 91913. Staff recommends that Mr. Davis' letter be received and filed. Pulled from Consent Calendar. Tom Davis, 1657 Gothem Street, Chula Vista, CA 91913, stated he thought the staff report presented to Council was a misinterpretation of the issue he raised and the request he made in his letter. There was a funding priority list for traffic signals which was not being followed. The result was that intersections needing traffic control were not getting them. He asked Council to review the policy and said he did not think his letter should just be filed. ~ d Mayor Nader asked staff if there had been a Council vote to change the priority list. Cliff Swanson, City Engineer, answered that there had not been. The priority list was presented, Camino del Cerro Grande was ranked on the priority list in 1990 as number three. During the budget process of the CIP, staff did indicate that Otay Lakes Road and Gotham Street were subject to the Transit Center and that would be the reason it was not being funded immediately. Any construction of the Transit Center could tear out signal work just put in and would be an unwise expenditure of funds. Mayor Nader asked if the prioritization of that intersection was dependent upon the construction of the Transit Center or if it had that priority independently of the Transit Center. Mr. Swanson answered that it had the priority independent of the Transit Center but that priority listing was based on traffic at the different intersections. Mayor Nader asked when the Center was expected to be built. Mr. Davis said according to the specialist, Steve Ron, handling that for the County, it would go into operation mid-1993 at the ea~iest. But he thought because of other considerations it would not meet that deadline. He said the situation requiring the traffic signal was there now and did not think people should be placed at risk to save money. Mayor Nader asked when the signal at Anita and Industrial was expected to be finished. Mr. Swanson answered that it was in design at present and construction should occur in the current fiscal year and would take one to two months to complete. ~') Minutes February 18, 1992 Page 3 Councilman Malcolm said that the Capital Improvement Budget hearings were going to start soon and at that time projects would be ranked. It seemed appropriate to accept staffs report and notify Mr. Davis of when that hearing would be on that item so he could attend. MS (Malcolm/Moore) a memo from the City Manager be provided to Council at the time of the Capital Improvement hearing on who has authority and when the priority list would be changed; to accept ~aff recommendation; and, notify Mr. Davis of upcoming hearing date. Councilman Moore asked where the source of funds was coming from for the installation of the light at Anita. Mr. Swanson said he did not have the CIP budget in front of him but believed it was traffic signal funds, projects had to be signal related to use those funds. Traffic signal funds were paid by developers throughout the City. VOTE ON MOTION: approved unanimously. b. Letter regarding formation of a TwinPore Task Force by the City of San Diego expansion of Phase I Economic Impact Study - Penny Allen, Chair, Chula Vista Economic Development Commission. Staff recommends that the request for a Task Force be respectfully acknowledged but declined and that a letter be sent from the Mayor to the City of San Diego supporting this request of the Economic Development Commission. c. Letter regarding traffic concerns on Oleander and Sequoia Avenue~ ~ William F. Speir, 1543 Oleander Avenue, Chula Vista, CA. Staff recommends that no action be taken on Mr. Speir's request and that his letter be received and filed. d. Claims Against the City - Albert M. Chatham, c/o Kobert T. Gustafson, Attorney at Law, 226 Church Avenue, Chula Vista, CA glglO-2703. It is the recommendation ofthe City's claims consultants, Carl Warren & Company, and Risk Management, that the Application for Leave to Present a Late Claim be denied. 6. RESOLUTION 16503 APPROVING GRANT APPLICATION FOR THE STATE OF CAL1FORNIA'S HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE GRANT PROGRAM - The citizens of Chula Vista generate approximately 400 tons of household hazardous waste each year, most of which is disposed of illegally in the landfill. If awarded funding under this grant program the City would begin a household hazardous waste reduction and proper disposal awareness program. Staff recommends approval of the resolution and authorize the Ci~ Manager to execute. (Administration) 7. RESOLUTION 16504 APpROVINGANAGBRRMENTWITHEASTLAKEDE'VFJ,0PMENTCOMPANY REGARDING THE INTERIM FIRE STATION IN ~ - The agreement provides for an interira Fire Station No. 6 to be consmicted and equipped by EastLake Development Company on Lane Avenue in the EastLake Business Center. The agreement preserves and clarifies the intent of the existing EastLake I SPA Agreement, Part III: Public Facilities Financing Plan and will enhance the level of fire protection services in eastern Chula Vista. Target date for opening interim Fire Station No. 6 is 5/10/92. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Fire Chief) Pulled from Consent Calendar. Councilman Malcolm said it appeared to be a small expenditure but that the agreement was a major commitment in money and a major decision by the City Council. He said he did not have enough information before him to know if it was needed and if it was top priority. Minutes February 18, 1992 Page 4 City Manager Goss said the operational part was presented in terms of the current fiscal year budget and was adopted by Council as far as the additional positions to be filled and approximate time flame as to when they would be filled. There had been an adopted Master Plan and there was some question as to what the location of Fire Station Number Six would be, but that related a lot to what the final decision would be on the land use for Otay Ranch. The interim location could end up being the permanent location for the fire station. As the General Development Plan was processed through the City and County at the task force level, hopefully by the end of next summer, there would be a better idea as to what the General Development Plan would say and from that staff could define the Master Plan. Councilman Malcolm said he would never agree to putting anything in the budget again if he was being told the reason the staff report before him was justified was because it was included in the budget and information would be supplied at a later date to show why the money should be budgeted. Council had to have the back-up information to show how the money was intended to be spent and whether it should be appropriated. He did not think just because it was in the budget it was a reason to spend the money. He had a real problem when the developer was going to be given $550,000 of credit and it would not be known for over a year whether or not the fire station would be relocate& He questioned whether it would not be better to wait before giving the developer that kind of credit. Those issues should have been addressed in the report because they were important. He stated that he had concern with no income coming from the EastLake area. Sam Lopez, Fire Chief, stated there was only one station east ofi-805 by Southwestern College. As activities increased and developments got larger there would be a need for a backup station. Currently the backup came from the station at 'J" Street and in some cases from Bonita. The limits on the fire station Master Plan were being approached and a decision needed to be made in getting the fire station. When the Fire Station Master Plan was done, the site at Tetra Nova was given up and decision was made to rebuild the fire station on 'J' Street, build a station in the EastLake or Salt Creek area and relocate Station Number Four into the Rancho Del Rey area. Councilman Malcolm asked how long it took to get from the fire station on Otay Lakes to EastLake. Fire Chief Lopez answered seven to nine minutes. Councilman Malcolm asked if the Montgomery areas response time was worse or better than that. Fire Chief Lopez answered that the majority of the Montgomery area was served better because of the street network which made it was easier to travel. When talking about response time, that meant from the time 911 was called until arrival on the scene. There was better coverage in the rest of the City than in the EastLake area. The new station was designed to serve all the eastern territories. Councilman Moore asked if it was going to be designed in such a way that if the ranch was annexed to the City that the interim station could be relocated except for the pad. He had the same concern as Councilman Malcolm and did not see income coming in so there was a concern. Chief Lopez answered that the interim station was a modular that could be relocate& Councilwoman Grasser Horton asked what the response time from the existing facility would be to the Olympic Training Facility. Marry Chase, Assistant Management Services Director, answered fifteen to twenty minutes. Minutes February 18, 1992 Page S Mayor Nader said he did not think it fair to place the burden of operating expenses on the City as a whole when residential development did not pay its own way under the tax structure and could not be expected to. He had asked before in the context of the budget process for a policy that would bring forward fiscal impact information that would make clearer what they could expect to see in regard to operating revenues and costs and would give guidance as to how it would fit into the Growth Management Program. There was an obligation to provide service and standards that had been adopted and committed to and he thought that commitment should be met. He asked what the $550,000 was being credited against. Mr. Chase answered that it was a project that would be included in the City's Public Facilities Development Impact Lease. The developer, by fronting the money for the project at the time they get building penits, would receive a credit. Mayor Nader asked if the developer would also receive credit for a penanent facility at another location ff that became necessary. Mr. Chase said they were currently looking at two alternative sites. One would be to make the interim site the penanent location and the other was a site in Salt Creek Kanch. If a decision were made for the Salt Creek Ranch site, that site in tens of supporting infrastructure probably would not be available for at least another three years and probably more than five years. They were currently collecting monies from developers to support those and other fire related projects. He said a little over $300,000 of the $550,000 was for equipment that would move to a penanent station regardless of where it was sited. The remaining approximately $175,000 was for the temporary structure. If they attempted to sell it back to the developer, in some sense they would be violating the Development Impact Fees because they had already collected money. They were collecting money in tens of a fire fund for a variety of fire projects. If the station were being built in Salt Creek Ranch the developer of that particular project would be required to front the money and build the station. The fee was based on looking at the total cost of all fire related projects including that one and then divided by the number of dwelling units. Councilman Moore said he thought staff had planned well for major developments. He asked the City Manager if he had data that supported the fact that the development to the east was self supporting, that it was not a drain on the treasury from other areas of the City. City Manager Goss answered that was correct. There was a fund that was created in which the revenue that was projected from EastLake and its development versus the City's expenditure. They do have data to show that basically the new development had been following what the study projections were and that was that they paid for themselves. MS (Grasser Horton/Moore) to continue item for one week and ask staff to come back with more information. Councilman Rindone said the way the Al13 was drafted there was indication that there was strong likelihood it would end up being a penanent facility. He also wanted more assurance from staff that they would look at that possibility. Mayor Nader said he would like to see a report on the revenues that had been produced by eastern development and the costs of servicing that area. He recognized that there was some intent that some of the costs be clefrayed by commercial development which had lagged for a variety of reasons, including the state of the economy. Minutes February 18, 1992 Page 6 Councilman Rindone said that the one time cost that EastLake was responsible for was the setup cost, i.e. the land, fire truck, equipment, etc. As the City got into major development there would be a need to look at containing possibilities of phasing in public safety services prior to the major projects and development. Mayor Nader said that under the existing tax structures imposed by the State, residential development unless there was significant special assessments, would never pay for itself in those services. The only way to make a whole development pay for itself was if the revenues from commercial and industrial development offset the costs to the City of residential development. He said when the report came back he did not want to see just what the costs had been up to now, he wanted to see the projected costs also. VOTE ON MOTION: approved unanimously. 8. RESOLUTION 16805 RATIFYING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT UHCD) TO PROVIDE $2,000 OF HOME FEDERAL HOUSING FIJNDS - The agreement provides that the State will transfer $2,000 from the State's HOME funds for the purpose of becoming a participating jurisdiction. The transfer is conditioned on the Councirs adoption of the 1991/96 Housing Element on 3/10/92, submittal to the State by 3/12/92, and a subsequent review and finding by HCD that the adopted Element is in substantial compliance. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Community Development) 9. RESOLUTION 16506 APPROVINGANAGRF-~MENTWITHFNPROjECTSTOPROVIDELOWAND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING WITHIN SALT CI~EF.K I - Condition No. 11 of the Tentative Map required the applicant to reach an agreement with the City to devote 10% of the project units to low and moderate income housing. The agreement provides for 2.5% low and 7.5% moderate income housing within the Salt Creek I ~Condominium Project Arean. The developer will subsidize the low income units by depositing $301,878.15 into an escrow account to be used by the City to assist approximately thirteen low income purchases in Salt Creek I. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Community Development) Pulled from Consent Calendar. Councilman Rindone stated that one of the questions he asked staff raised an additional issue and it was the concern about the protection for windfall profits. On page 9-2 under the section 'Resale Controln he had requested additional explanation and staffs response had been that the deed restriction language had not been determined to date. However, they could place some resale restrictions for the first ten years and it could be limited to the first time home buyers and he felt that may be too short. They were not trying to create profits for short term low/middle income housing and then have them off the market. The objective that both the City and the developer had been trying to accomplish had been defeated. Chris Salomone, Director of Community Development, stated that the ten year standard was based on a precedent that had been set in other types of affordable housing. Basically it was based on the mortgage revenue bond programs which the City participated in the mid-80's. By subsidizing for sale units they were kept on the market with those restrictions for ten years and restricted to the first time home buyers. Ten years was a typical life for a density bonus to a developer and he had to retain them. The other criteria was to allow the low income buyer to realize some equity and to grow. In order to do that the resale price had to grow in order to allow that low income purchaser to ultimately be able to take their equity out of that home and maybe transfer it into a larger home. Councilman Malcolm said the problem was that after ten years there would be no more low income housing. Also at the end of the tenth year, who knew what the value of that property might be and that person could get a windfall profit. What he wanted to see was that it had to be owner occupied. If a person bought it and moved out in a couple years he could not keep it as a rental or use it for something else waiting for the ten years to make a big profit. He also did not want to have the property disappear from the low/income housing market. He said he was not locked in to the person having to be a first time home buyer and did not mind some appreciation in value, but to decontrol it totally at the end of ten years did not seem to be proper. City Attorney Boogaard said it would require some additional legal research on the issue of whether or not that constituted an excess restraint on alienation and requested time to do the research. MS (Rindone/Malcolm) to trail item to within two weeks. Councilman Moore said the state had passed a law to accept 10% low/moderate and it seemed to him that had been a negotiable term. City Attorney Boogaard said that could be a legitimate difference between equity participation in the affordable housing program and a general plan imposed affordable housing program. Mayor Nader said that if excess restrain on alienation did turn out to be a concern, he wondered if instead of extending the ten year period or extending it to a point where it would raise those questions, perhaps require some sort of residual interest in a fund set aside to assist low income housing so that fund could share in some percentage of appreciation that might occur over a given period of time. Claudia Troisi, representing the Baldwin Company, stated that the agreement was set up in such a fashion that the deed restrictions could trail the agreement itself. They could bring back the deed restrictions to Council before they were completed. The deed restrictions were a function of the Cit'/s desire to maintain the housing and they all wanted some time to work on it from both standpoints. The agreement itself could go forward with the deed restrictions following. Councilman Rindone said as maker of the motion, he would be willing to amend the motion to approve the agreement except for the deed restrictions which would be brought back in two weeks, the second also agreed. Councilwoman Grasser Horton said she had no problem with it having to be owner occupied for ten years before they were able to sell the property. City Attorney Boogaard said he was concerned about the enforcement mechanism as to the contents of the deed restriction once executed and given away on the basic agreement. Mr. Salomone said the deed restrictions would come back at a later date. The agreement did say ten years and he thought perhaps the motion should be amended to say the term of the deed restriction would be a minimum of ten years. City Attorney Boogaard said then basically it would be an agreement to agree in the future which was not going to be an enforceable mechanism on the length. Once the agreement was signed they could not require Baldwin or FN Projects to come back with an acceptable set of deed restrictions. Mayor Nader said what he thought the motion would do would be to move ahead on the agreement except that portion that dealt with the deed restriction and to have that portion of the agreement returned to Council. Minutes February 18, 1992 Page 8 ~ Mr. Salomone said the Baldwin Company would pay a subsidy of $600 per unit, totaling $301,000 as calculated at its maximum. Councilman Rindone stated he appreciated the legal concern and withdrew his last motion and returned to his original motion to delay the item within two weeks. VOTE ON MOTION: approved unanimously. 10. RESOLUTION 16507 APPROVING STATE-LOCAL PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM MA,~-r~,R AGREEMENT NUMBER SLTPP-5203 BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND ALrFHORI ZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO SIGN ALL PROGRAM SUPPLE~ TO STATE- LOCAL TRANSPORTATION PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM AGReeMENT - Council Resolutions 14150, 15738° and 16259 approved the submittal of applications for State-Local Transportation Partnership Program funds in cycles 1, 2, and 3. In order to qualify for funding under said program the City is required to enter into an agreement with the State that delineates certain responsibilities relative to the prosecution of all projects in the different cycles. There will be one program supplement agreement for each project. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works) Pulled from Consent Calendar. Mayor Nader said the agreement being approved referred to standard accommodation of utility facilities and asked if those standards included a trenching fee for utilities. Cliff Swanson, City Engineer, answered that they did not. If they had to relocate their utilities, they had to dig their own trenches and put in their own utilities. Under the franchise that most the utilities had for occupying the City's streets, if the City did work on them that caused those utilities to encroach within the City's street area, the utilities had to relocate their facilities at no cost to the City. The City had prior rights in most cases. If the utilities had prior rights then the City would have to pay 100% of their costs. Mayor Nader said he was not clear on which phases the item related to. He asked if the agreement was for those first three phases or did it include the fourth. Mr. Swanson said that a Master Agreement applied to the first three cycles, the fourth cycle and any subsequent cycles that the state had. Each individual project would have a sub-agreement. He said the first three cycles were set in concrete. Cycle one was already underway and the others were based on budgeted projects. Staff did not have the ability to move from cycle two to cycle three if the deadline was missed or to change any of the items on the different cycles. Decisions on what was in cycle four would be made after the Council approved the Capital Improvement Program budget. They would then look at the projects Council had approved and determine what financing they had that allowed them to have an eligible project. Mayor Nader requested that the discussion take place and appropriate information be provided to Council in conjunction with the Capital Improvements Project budget proceedings. RESOLUTION 16507 OFFERED BY MAYOR NADER, reading of the text was waived, passed and apprnved unanimously. 11. RESOLUTION 16508 APPROVING AN AGR F, EMENT FOR PAYMENT OF CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS ON FIFFH AVENUE FRONTING THE VILLA DEL REY CONDOMINIUMS - On 3/14/90, the Planning Commission approved Tentative Map 90-5, the Villa Del Rey Condominiums. A condition of approval required the developer to consumct street improvements on Fifth Avenue along the frontage of the properly. In lieu of constructing the improvements, the developer has entered into an Minutes February 18, 1992 Page 9 agreement to pay the City for constructing the improvements in conjunction with a capital improvement project. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works) 12. REPORT DRAFT AMENDE TO THE CITY'S SIGN ORDINANCE TO ADDP, EgS SIGN PROCESSING, FJ.RCTRONIC READER BOARD SIGNS, AND COMBINATION SIGN MURALS - On 1/28/92, Council directed the City Attorney and Planning Department staff to prepare draft amendments to the City's sign ordinance to address: 1) Modifying the process for review of sign permits by the Zoning Administrator and the Design Review Committee; 2) Allowing electronic message board signs in commercial zones; and, 3) Allowing combination sign-murals which may exceed the size restrictions for conventional sigm. The Council also requested that the draft amendments be distributed to several groups and organizations for initial review and comment, and returned to Council for further consideration at their meeting on 2/18/92. Staff recommends the Council confirm that the draft amendments are consistent with Council direction, and direct staff to process these amendments and receive input from relevant Boards and Commissions. (City Attorney & Director of Planning) Pulled from Consent Calendar. Councilwoman Grasser Horton said she had a problem with some of the definition of a sign mural and an electronic reader board sign and asked staff for a better definition. She also asked staff how they came up with the specifications of the ordinance. Bob Loiter, Director of Planning, said staff basically took general direction from Council as to a concept of a combination of a sign and a mural. Staff had also received some general direction from Council three weeks prior on the issue of over-concentration of electronic reader board signs. Staff took an ordinance provision that was applied to certain other types of over-concentration issues and applied that as a standard. They did not have any specific basis for it. In other issues where cities were concerned about over- concentration it normally pertained to no more than one of those uses per City block and that was a typical standard. Councilman Malcolm said he would like to see the item in a workshop setting were they could sit down and go over each item. MS (Moore/Malcolm) to agendize this item for the 3/26/92 Council Meeting/Workshop at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Conference Room. Mayor Nader said he would also expect that comments be solicited from the various commissions between now and the March workshop. He thought murals could have some merit and his proposal to include them in the ordinance was not to make them automatic but to make it possible for them to be approved under some circumstances. Electronic signs should be spaced out to avoid a Las Vegas type effect. He thought there should be some period within which staff needed to act or the approval was deemed granted. If workload was high, the solution would be that staff would only give scrutiny to those signs that presented serious aesthetic issues rather than getting into very deta~ed matters of what amounted to subjective individual tastes. VOTE ON MOTION: apprnved 4-0-1 with Councilwoman Grasser Horton absent. * * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * * Minutes February 18, 1992 Page 10 PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLIJTIONS AND ORDINANCES 13. PUBLIC HEARING GPA-91-04, PCZ-91-F, C/TY-INITIATED PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN FROM 'RESEARCH AND LIMITED MANIJFACTLrRING* TO *RETAIL COMMERCIAL', TO AMEND TI-IE MONTGOMERY SPECIFIC PLAN FROM *RESEARCH AND LIMITED INDUSTRIAL" AND *OTHER* TO *MERCANTILE AND OFFICE COMMERCIAL* AND TO REZONE FROM I-L-P TO C-C-P CERTAIN THREE ACRE TERRITORY LOCATED SOUTH OF PALOMAR STREET BETWEEN BROADWAY AND THE METROPOLITAN TROLLEY DEVELOPMENT BOARD (MTDB) PALOMAR TROH.RY STATION -The City- initiated General Plan Amendment, Montgomery Specific Plan Amendment, and rezone for three acres located on the southerly side of Palomar Street are required actions for implementation of an expanded 18.2 acre Palomar Trolley Center commercial project pursuant to Council/Redevelopment Agency direction in August 1990. Staff recommends Council place the Ordinance on first reading and approve the resolutions. (DirectorofPlanning) STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE PUBLIC HEARING BE OPENED AND CONTINUED TO 2/25/92. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open. There being no public testimony, the public hearing was declared closed. MSUC (Malcolm/Nader) to continue the public hearing to 2/25/92. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS a. Lawrence P. Coleman, 368 Hilltop Drive, Chula Vista, CA 92910, expressed disappointment and discouragement on the way the City was being run. He stated he had tried for two weeks to make an appointment with the Mayor but was unable to get past the Mayor's staff. Mayor Nader said that staff had told him Mr. Coleman had indicated he wanted to speak directly with the Mayor on the telephone. Mr. Coleman stated he had talked to two different people. The initial request was for an appointment. The conclusion was someone would call him back and that was two weeks prior. Mayor Nader apologized for the miscommunication. Mr. Coleman said his complaint was with the Police Department. In the past he had a good relationship with the Police Department, but since November and the retirement of the former Police Chief, he had had problems. He said the interim Police Chief and the current Police Chief had imposed very high citation quotas on the traffic officers. He knew that because he had been told so by a police officer. He said he had been subjected to two cases of harassment within the past month by the Traffic Depat tt.ent. In December and January, traffic citations for violation of signs in the 700 block of Third Avenue rose 500% over the previous three months. He recommended that: (1) Council request and make public the number of overall traffic citation statistics for the previous six months from August 1991 to January 1992; (2) Council review Police Department policy on citation quotas and provide appropriate oversight and direction to the Chief of Police and make such action public; and, (3) Instruct the City's traffic engineer to restudy the Post Office traffic problem and to advise the Police Department on the proper interpretation of the current signage and road markings in that area and then revise the signage and markings as appropriate. He had also been tailgated in a very aggressive manner all the way from approximately Fifth Avenue to Hilltop on 'F' Street by a police car in the dark. He did not realize it was a police car until he turned into his driveway and looked to see who was driving the car. He said there was no apparent reason and the police officer did not stop him. He said that kind of aggressiveness did not belong in the City. It was confirmed to him by an officer that staff was feeling the same kind of pressure inside the department that he as a citizen was witnessing and feeling outside. Minutes February 18, 1992 Page 11 Councilman Moore asked if the illegal turn had been at the southem driveway of the Post Office going around the stanchions. Mr. Coleman answered he was going south and then turned back to go north making a u-turn, but did go well past the stanchions. He said the no left turn sign was facing the driveway coming out of the Post Office. Councilman Malcolm stated that u-turns could not be made in the middle of Third Avenue. Mr. Coleman said it was designed for turning either way. Councilman Malcolm stated he did not think that making a u-turn in the center of the block was legal regardless of what the traffic engineer said. Mr. Coleman said the citation was for making a left turn and that was presumably what they were citing everyone for. The real issue was that the Police Department was seizing upon a particular situation in order to meet their quotas. MS (Nader/Grasser Horton) to refer the comments to staff for a public report back to Council. City Manager Goss confirmed that the citation statistics were public information. He said that information was provided on the motorcycle officers on a monthly basis. That information and any other crime or citation information could be provided to Council. To his knowledge there was no quota system or enforcement system of that type. Areas around the community were identified, especially where there were unsafe movements or speed problems. Staff could provide a report giving Council information about the statistics, etc. Councilman Moore said he had observed people delibertly going around the stanchions that had been put at the Post Office to prevent people from making those dangerous left hand turns. He said the rules of the road, as he interpreted it, was that if there was a double left-hand turn lane and a person was in that turn lane, then they were authorized to do a 90 degree turn into driveways or other streets but never a u-turn. They were called double left-hand turn lanes not u-turn lanes. VOTE ON MOTION: approved unanimously. b. Dee Donahue, 693 "J" Street, Chula Vista, CA 9191 O, manager of the Vegas Club cardroom, said the owner of the cardroom had been trying for many years to get changes in the ordinances that would allow them to compete more fairly with other cardrooms. To date nothing had happened. Two years ago longer hours were given, they were given changes in the way to collect money and also given the game of 'hold- em." The Governor had not signed the bill so the next week everything was taken away from them without it being explained except in technicalities. Then over a year ago, the Governor signed a bill that made jackpots and the game of hold-em legal. As of the first of the year, seven-card stud was also made legal. She said they had not heard anything from the City and had no idea as to what was happening or whether they were going to be allowed to stay in business. She said that over and over the City Council had told them they preferred small cardrooms. According to the former Police Chief, the Police DeparUnent had never had a problem with any of the cardrooms. The Vegas Club had never cost the tax payers money, never had anyone leave the cardroom drunk. They have had to lay employees off and if things kept going the way they were, all the employees would lose their jobs. She wanted to know if the small cardrooms were going to be kept or if they would be forced out of business. MS (Nader/Moore) to refer to staff for a report back to Council on what changes in state law had occurred. Councilman Moore stated that the City Council, as policy makers, had full control of cardrooms. The majority of the policy makers had felt that small cardrooms were not adverse to the City. Minutes February 18, 1992 Page 12 Councilman Malcolm asked if the motion was just asking for a report or if a hearing would be set so action could be taken. Mayor Nader answered that it would be a report outlining to Council the changes in the state laws and then a decision could be made whether the item should be docketed. VOTE ON MOTION: approved 4-1 with Councilman Malcolm opposed. ACTION ITEMS 14.A. REPORT LE'FI'ER REQUESTING APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING A COMI~H-ri'EE TO ENACT A PATRIOTIC ALTERNATIVE TO COMMERCIAL TAKEOVER OF AMERICAN AIRCRAFT PRODUCTION AND MAINTF2~ANCE (P.A.C.T.) - Support of a resolution was requested by William Hickey, Sr., San Diego Area Director, P.A.C.T., 4150 Kearny Mesa Road, San Diego, CA 92111, as a Written Communication of 2/4/92. Two altematives are presented. Continued from 2/11/92 meeting. B. RESOLUTION 16502 SUPPORTING EFFORTS TO FIND A SUITABLE ALTERNATIVE TO FOREIGN INVESTMF_.grS IN MCDONALD DOUGLAS AND GENERAL DYNAMICS CORPORATION RESOLUTION 1650'2, AMF2qI)ED TO ADOPT ALTERNATIVE TWO AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF, WAS OM, F.P, ED BY COUNCILMAN RINDONE, reading of the text was waived. William Hickey, Sr,, 13204 Ridgedale, Poway, CA, President of Local Lodge 125, Machinist Union, stated that he was in complete agreement with the resolution. VOTE ON MOTION: approved unanimously. BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS None submitted. ITEMS pUIJ.RI3 FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR Items pulled: Sa, 7, 9, 10 and 12. The minutes will reflect the published agenda order. OTHER BUSINESS 15. ~;rf'f MANAGER'S REPORT(S) a. City Manager Goss stated on Thursday, 2/27/92, there would be a regular Council Meeting in a Workshop setting at 4:00 p.m. The two items scheduled were: (1) Information on the geographic information system, and (2) a joint meeting with the Safety Commission which was scheduled for 5:00 p.m. b. City Manager Goss said there was a panel discussion on the "University of California in the 90's" that was scheduled for 7:00 p.m. on Cox Cable channel 24 and Southwest Cable channel 16. Minutes February 18, 1992 Page 13 c. City Manager Goss passed on to Council a copy of a news release received from the County of San Diego stating that parts of Mission Bay and San Diego Bay were posted due to contamination. They indicated that they found water samples with high bacterial counts along the southern half of the Bay. The information staff had for Chula Vista's shoreline was that it was well below that standard. 16. MAYOWS REPORT(S) a. Mayor Nader said he noted in the release from the County of San Diego that the source of the contamination had not been determined but he wanted to remind staff and fellow citizens that the sewage pipe break in San Diego was not yet close to being repaired and had a potential for leading to contamination of Chula Vista's Bay. Chula Vista contributed approximately 8% of the flow into the pipe and it was imperative that Chula Vista citizens join those in the City of San Diego and around the region in conserving as much water as possible to maximize the time each day that could be devoted to repair of the pipe. b. MSUC (NaderAMoore) for ratification of the appoinUnent of Elsie Hashimoto to the I-[nrn~n Relations Commission. c. Mayor Nader said there had been an item on the agenda that was actually a Board and Commission Recommendation but at the request of the Commission Chair was put on as a Written Communication so the Commissioner would not have to sit through other items on the agenda. Councilman Moore said he thought they should have an option of putting an item either under Board and Commission Recommendations or under Written Communication. Mayor Nader asked staff to notify the Boards and Commissions of the option. d. Mayor Nader stated that normally material went to Council the Friday night before the Tuesday meeting. Staff was generally diligent although he thought there were occasional exceptions where Council received big piles of material the night of the meeting. He had heard comments from Councilmemben, and he knew and he had the same feelings back when he was a part-time Councilmember and had to balance that with a full time job, that sometimes getting a report the Friday night before a Tuesday meeting, did not necessarily provide the kind of time and comfort level of material that might be desirable. He put the item on the agenda to basically ascertain what interest there might be on the part of his colleagues in changing that policy to provide for staff materials being made available sometime prior to the issuance of the Council packets. Maybe moving the cycle up a week under routine or normal circumstances to provide extra time for Council to look at that type of material. If there was no interest in it on the part of the other Councilmembers it was not something that he personally felt a strong need to pursue right then. City Manager Goss said staff tried to process things as quickly as they could. If there was an item that Council felt uncomfortable with and did not have enough time to review Council could ask for a continuance. Mayor Nader said he thought the concern might be that once an item was placed on the agenda there was a certain public expectation that normally that meant it was going to be acted on. He suggested that Councilmembers provide individual input to the City Manager on the types of the items where it was appropriate. Councilman Rindone said that on last minute items which were of a comprehensive nature, Council needed to be assured that staff would provide an analysis. e. Mayor Nader announced that he would be attending a League of Cities Meeting on Thursday and Friday, 2/20 and 2/21/92, in Sacramento. There will be a workshop on the state progress toward a State Growth Management Plan and he would be reporting back to Council. Minutes February 18, 1992 Page 14 f. Mayor Nader said he had been working with the Mayor/Council aide and staff to develop a system to computerize information on constituent contacts for the Mayor and Counc~ Office which he would be using to help track the progress and disposition of constituent concerns and stated that the entire Council may want to use it. 17. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilman Rindone: a. Councilman Rindone said the first item was a concern about the Parking Enforcement Center that had been sending notifications for security alarm system license renewals and also permits. There seemed to be some miscommunication in mailings and notification and also some individuals after paying their renewal permit fees were then asked to pay initial application fees. There had been a number of inquiries on those letters mailed out and the fact that they were mailing to a location Irvine, California rather than Chula Vista. Staff was prepared to give an analysis of information to the citizens on that and particularly those who are being billed incorrectly for permits they had prior to the inception of the new renewal regulations. Richard Emerson, Chief of Police, stated that in August of 1991 the alarm ordinance was modified and it dealt with fee schedules, applications, renewals and penalties. In addition to that there was a contract established with ETECH (Enforcement Technology Incorporated). Annually the Police Department responds to about 6,500 false alarm calls and the ordinance was established to try to lower false alarms. There were three specific concerns that Councilman Rindone raised and those were all accurate. The first was that there were two mailings and both of those were confusing to the recipients. Second the quality of the correspondence did not meet the needs that the public should be able to deal with and third there was concern between the application and the renewal fees. There were two mailing that were intended to be sent out. The first was intended to go out to new applicants, The second was strictly renewal. New applicants would have to pay $10 for their fee, renewal would be $2 on a biannual basis. ETECH in the management of this program did not follow the written and verbal instructions that they received. As a result the first mailing went out and parties received issues that dealt with both renewals and initial applications. Furthermore the addresses did not correspond to the permit status, The renewals and the new applications were not separated as the City had asked, The City intervened and asked for a second mailing but during that ETECH sent out a report, sent it out bulk mail and so they did not send out what we had asked them to. There were several remedies to clarify this. The first was that he would like to let everyone know that renewals cost $2 on a biannual basis. If they do not have an alarm permit there was a one time $10 application fee. Staff would ensure that those people who paid $10 figuring that was the charge for the renewal fee would get their money refunded. A third mailing would be done, one that would resolve all of the issues and that would go out under his signature so that people would have a little better sense for that rather than receiving something in the mail that said send your money back to Irvine which was 75 to 100 miles away from here, and gave the impression that it was some kind of a scam. Also staff would be talking with ETECH to find out why this type of problem arose in the first place since they had written instructions which were followed up with verbal instructions. If they were unable to provide service as per the contract, the City would deal with that in the appropriate manner. Councilman Moore asked if staff made a visitation of the company before or a~er the contract. Chief Emerson said that he was told that there were visits with the vendor. During the process there was at least one other render and that ETECH was the best choice at that time. Councilwoman Grasser Hotton asked if everyone who had an alarm system was sent one of the notices. Chief Emerson said the only way they knew that someone had an alarm system, ff they had not applied for a permit, was when they received notification that their alarm was going off. Then the Police Department would respond and find out they did not have a permit. Minutes February 18, 1992 Page 15 Councilwoman Grasser Hotton asked if they were fined. Chief Emerson said they ask them to comply by submitting an application and that would count as their first false alarm. Two false alarms per year were allowed after that then a f'me was imposed. b. Councilman Rindone said that he had an opportunity to discuss a water taxi informally with the Mayor of Coronado and that it was an idea to expand upon due to the proposed Bayfront Project. He said it was an exciting option because it would benefit all three communities and even maybe National City as they developed their marina. The idea was to enhance and reinforce each others hotels, motels, recreational facilities. He requested a staff report as to how it could best be approached to enhance the prospect at such an early date so it would entice Port participation. A committee could possibly look at the idea. If a commitment was received from San Diego, Coronado, Chula Vista and possibly National City then he thought there would be a lot of positive response on the part of the Port Commission to look at avenues to open it up. MSUC G~ndone/Nader) to refer to staff to come back with a repor~ as to the best way to approach thjs. Councilman Rindone said that he thought that would accomplish another objective which was very high on the agenda and that was getting the Pores immediate attention to the prospect of a Bayfront Project. c. Councilman Rindone said there was a concern about the Mayor~s salary and expenses which may be at a level less than anticipated by most members of the community. That was always a very controversial item and he thought most citizens of the community were not aware that many of the executive secretarial positions of the City made more than the gross salary of the Mayor. In addition, the Mayor's aide, would make approximately $10,000 a year more than the Mayor so he requested it be referred to the Charter Review Commission, since there would be special elections in June, to see if they concurred with that COnCeITL MS CRindone/Grasser Hotton) to refer this to the Chmer Review Comrnlgsion, as well as for Council. Mayor Nader said he appreciated Rindone's efforts in that regard. He thought maybe one thing the Chatter Review Commission should consider in that context was at what time ir would be appropriate to bring such an item forward. Councilman Malcolm said the Charter Review Commission last time felt that the Mayor deserved more money than what was recommended and he was on the vote to reduce the amount. He thought now was not the time to consider going to the voters. He suggested that it not be just the Mayor's salary but also the Council's salary. Both needed to be reviewed. Councilwoman Grasser Hotton said they were just asking that it be reviewed, it may not go to the voters this year. Councilman Malcolm said that unless they were willing to place it on the ballot this year, why get a recommendation this year that might be inappropriate two years from now. Councilman Moore said that in comparison to the other sixteen cities in the County, the total compensation package was quite a bit above theirs. VOTE ON MOTION: approved 4-1 with Councilman Malcolm opposed. d. Councilman Rindone said he would like to have a staff report concerning any change on potential commercial usage on the Bayfront. There had been some items reported in the media to that effect and he did not have that information available. City Manager Goss said from what staff knew there had been a party outside the state that had attempted to purchase the property on the Bayfront and to place it in escrow. To his knowledge it was still open in Minutes February 18, 1992 Page 16 escrow and had not closed. At that point the update would be that it was still pending, whether or not it closed depended on financing and given the uncertainty of economic times whether or not that proceeded was something they really did not know. Councilman Malcolm said there was a letter that should be received that week, if it had not already been received, or it may already be in the Mayor/Council offices from Mr. Zammararo regarding what he wanted. He wanted a commitment of 100°,6 of the City's sales tax, property tax, and first born. If they were willing to give that he would be willing to come to Chula Vista, it was just crazy. City Manager Goss said that he had not personally seen the letter. ADJOURNMENT The City Council recessed at 8:40 p.m. and met in a closed session at 8:50 p.m. to discuss: Pending litigation pursuant to Govemment Code Section 54956.9 - Kerby v. City of Chula Vista, et al. Impending threatened/potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 relating to use of prevailing wages in conjunction with Proposition A, Public Works project. Instructions to negotiators regarding personnel pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6. Adjourned at 9:00 p.m. to the Regular City Council Meeting on February 25, 1992 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. Respectfully submitted, BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CMC, City Clerk by: ~ ' Carla~~trati~