Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1993/03/16MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA Tuesday, March 16, 1993 Council Chambers 6:01 p.m. Public Services Building CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Councilmembers Fox, Moore, Rindone, and Mayor Nader ABSENT: Councilmember Horton ALSO PRESENT: John D. Goss, CityManager; Bruce M. Boogaard, CityAttorney; and Beverly A. Authelet, CMC 2. PI.~r}GE OF ,~l J .RGIANCE TO THE FLAG, SILENT PRAYER 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: March 2, 1993, March 9, 1993 and March 9, 1993 (.An Adjourned and Special Joint Meeting of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency) MSC {Moore/Fox) to approve the minutes of March 2, 1993, March 9, 1993 (Council and Council/RDA}. Approved 4-0-1 with Hotton absent and Nader abstaining on March 9, 1993. 4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY: a. InU'oduction of 1993 Miss Chula Vista, Dawne Saunders; Miss Chula Vista Princess, Arlene Tortes; and Miss Chula Vista Princess, Tanya Trupp; by Mar~in Barros, President, Chula Vista Jaytees. CONSENT CALENDAR (Items pulled: none) CONSENT CAt.I~NDAR O~ BY MAYOR NADER, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved J,-O-1 with Hotton absent; Counciknan Rindone voted no on Ireurn No. 5. 5. WRrl-rEN COMMUNICATIONS: a. I~trer requesting that a letter be written to the Supreme Cotlit requestiag that the Court hear the matter of establishing preservation of property tax revenue as local revenue - Michael A. Blanco, Mayor, City of Alhambra, P. O. Box 351, Alhambra, CA 91802-23S1. It is recommended that the Council direct staff to write a letter to the Supreme Court urging them to accept this case for review. Councilman l~ndone voted no on the item. Cit3, A~torney Boogaard stated the strongest show of support would be a resolution of the Council urging the Cour~ to receive the review and hear the petition. He had anticipated sending the letter from his office. Mayor Nader suggested staff move forward with the recommendation and if the City Attorney deemed it advisable, bring forward a resolution in one week. 6. RESOLUTION 17031 APPROPRIATING $19,424 FROM ~ UNAPPROPRL~IF.D BALAN{~ OF ~ GENERAL FUND RESERVES FOR PAYMENT OF THE ADDITIONAL COSTS FOR THE 11/3/92 ~.I~-CTION - On 11/3/92, the City held a Municipal Election. At that election, the City elected two council members plus Minutes March 16, 1993 Page 2 ) considered five propositions. The final cost of the election exceeded the estimates. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (City Clerk) 4/Sth's vote required. 7. RESOLUTION 17032 ESTABHSHING TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR FINAL PRICING AND DELIVERY OF BONDS IN ~ DIb-rHICT NUMBER 90-2 (OTAY VAIJJ~Y ROAD) - On 6/30/92, Council approved bonds for Assessment District Number 90-2, Otay Valley Road. Delays in the project make it necessary for Council to re-authorize issuance of bonds. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Finance and Director of Public Works) City Attorney Boogaard informed Council that a revised resolution had been read as parr of the Consent Calendar. The difference between the resolutions was that it was unnecessary to authorize the re-issuance of bonds and terms but Council needed to extend the previously granted authority to the Finance Director to set final pricing of the bonds. 8. RESOLUTION 17034 APPROVING A JOINT USE AGliERMENT WiTH SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY (S~) TO ALLOW THE CHY TO MAINTAIN A STORM DRAIN ~ SDGStE'S EASEMENT AND AUTHORIZING TI-IE MAYOR TO EXECI. rrE SAID AGRF, F, MENT - Development of property owned by R.E. Hazard, at the northeast comer of "C" S~eet and North Fifth Avenue, required the construction of a double-reinforced, concrete box culvert as part of the improvements. The alignment of the new storm drain required crossing an existing SDG&E Company easement. Since SDG&E has senior rights, the City is required by SDG&E to enter into a Joint Use Agreement in order to maintain the storm drain facilities. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works) 9. RESOLUTION 17034 A~G CALIFORNIA STATE LIBRARY SUffH-YEAR MATCHING ~ AWARDED TO THE CHULA VISTA LITERACY TEAM, APPROPRIATING FUNDS, AND AMENDING FISCAL YEAR ~ 1992-93 BUDGET - The California State Library has announced that California Library Services Act funds are available to continue funding on a limited basis for programs which were awarded five-year grants through the California Literacy Campaign. Accepting the grant extension will provide $23,309 in FY 1992-93 to Chula Vista Literacy Team. The funds cannot supplant existing funds. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Acting Library Director) 4/5th's vote required. 10.A. REPORT APPLICATION OF THE CHULA VISTA PUBLIC LIBRARY FOR CALIFORNIA DEPAKTMENT OF EDUCATION ADULT BASIC EDUCATION SECTION 321 FUNDING FOR FY 1992-93 THROUGH 1994-9S FOR THE (~JLA VISTA LI-tP. RACY TEAM - The Public Library has applied for ABE Section 321 funds in a new California Department of Education three-year grant cycle. Accepting the grant will provide $5,64S in FY 1992-93 to implement a staff development program and to purchase instructional materials. The grant has been approved for a three-year period; the fiscal portion is approved for a one-year period but is renewable annually through FY 1994-95. Funds cannot be used to supplant the current volunteer tutor program. Staff recommends acceptance of the report and approval of the resolution. (Acting Library Director) B. RESOLUTION 17035 ACCEPTING CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION ADULT BASIC EDUCATION (ABE) SECTION 321 GRANT FUNDS AWARDED TO THE CHULA VISTA LITERACY TEAM, APPROPRIATING FUNDS, AND AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR (FY) 1992-93 BUDGET - 4/S!h's vote * * END OF CONSENT CALENDAK * * PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES 11. PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERATION OF M/~'t~R FEE SCHEDULE UPDATE AND RELATED CHANGES TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE - The second phase of the Master Fee Schedule update will: (1) make several administrative and technical changes in the Municipal Code relating to the assessment of fees; (2) Minutes March 16, 1993 Page 3 update designated existing fees to account for increases in costs; (3) make adjustments in fees to provide for more equitable and accurate cost assessment; and (4) propose adoption of new fees for recently evolved services or for special services currently being provided at no additional charge. Staff reeomrnellds the nublic hearing be onened, public teslimonv taken and continued to 3/23/93. (Director of Finance) Mayor Nader stated there had been an error in the legal public noticing and therefore Council was prohibited from taking action. City Manager Goss stated staff met with identifiable groups that had expressed an interest. He felt some of the concerns voiced would be based on misinformation. It was not an effort to balance the General Fund or budget but a matter of tTying to create equity and avoid the general taxpayers paying for special services. The package included non-resident fees, flat fees versus deposit account, services provided for which fees were never provided, technical legal changes, and reduction in fees in certain areas. Councilman Fox stated there had been concern by the churches, especially in the eastern area, regarding the impact of changes in the Master Fee Schedule. He questioned how they were being treated differently in the new schedule City Manager Goss stated it was a different issue. They were talking about development impact fees as they were related to stteets, which was not a part of the public hearing. Staff had talked to the Ministerial Group and because they did not represent all the churches he felt furLher dialogue was necessary. Councilman Fox questioned whether staff had looked at the recommendation of deferring the fee increases for one year. City Manager Goss stated the problem was complex; if delayed a year the reductions that could be saved would also be delayed. Staff felt the reductions could be beneficial to businesses. The point was that the general taxpayer should not be paying for specialized services and if delayed for a year the taxpayer would continue to subsidize those services. Lyman Christopher, Director of Finance, stated there was a provision in the proposed fee schedule for a waiver of fees for churches. Mayor Nader questioned whether any of the fees were considered by staff to be applicable to churches or non-profit social service agencies. Cheryl Frnchter, Revenue Manager, stated that some of the fees applied to new developments also applied to churches. In the past with that type of development very often fee waivers had been granted due to the benefit to the community or financial hardship. Mayor Nader stated it was his understanding staff was developing a policy that would provide guidelines as to waiver of such fees and questioned when it would be brought back to Council for review. Robert Leiter, Director of Planning, stated the Department was working with the referral which dealt with planning fees, building fees, and development impact fees. He anticipated the report would come to Council next month. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open. · John Seymour, 6336 Greenwich Drive, #7, San Diego, CA, representing the Construction Industx3r Federation, thanked the staff for meeting with them and addressing their questions and concerns. He presented two letters, dated 3/10/93 and 3/16/93 which outlined six fee increases on the horizon. If the six increases were added together they would result in a $6,000 increase to a single family home. The fees were justifiable and reasonable but due to the economy they requested a one year delay on fees that impacted the business community, direct staff to come back with modifications, or accept the economic triggers. Minutes March 16, 1993 Page 4 Mayor Nader stated it was his understanding that while fees for residential construction would increase business fees would be substantially decreased. Gerald Young, Administrative Analyst I, responded that one of the questions that arose during discussions with CIF, EDC, and Chamber was the impact the Master Fee Schedule proposals would have on EDLFs in general. Staff looked at several different size projects and it did result in negative impact of about $24,000 on a typical retail business or a restaurant and approximately $27,OOO for the warehouse. City Manager Goss stated that 'negative~ meant that it would cost less after the fees were adjusted. Mayor Nader stated he would like to see more information developed on how the proposals were expected to affect existing or future manufacturing uses in the City. He felt residential development had been rapid enough in the City but job development was a different story. He requested that the proposal for the one year moratorium be refined to indicate what fees would be impacting job growth in the City, manufacturing, and affordable housing. · Joe Casillas, 1060 Calma Drive, Chula Vista, CA, stated he was not opposed to fee increases ff a number of things were done. A group should be established to review City operations so that the taxpayer was convinced that whatever the Council decided to do was in the taxpayers interest. He felt the timing could not be worse for fee increases. There needed to be a connection between the cost of the service and service provided. · Rod Davis, 653 Redlands Place, Bonita, CA, representing the Chamber of Commerce, stated times were not good in the City of Chula Vista. The Chamber raised three issues: 1) look at City operation, services, and have a plan in hand to reduce the cost of operating a City to be commensurate with the revenues produced, which were going to be less; 2) affordable housing; and 3) development fee increases. They requested that the Council delay increases for one year. · Patty Davis, 653 Redlands Place, Chula Vista, CA, representing the San Diego County Council of Real Estate Boards, stated their concern was on the affect the proposed fee increases would have on affordable housing. The City should readdress the Traffic Impact Fees per dwelling unit and look at another way. She encouraged Council to delay the fees due to the economic times and because of the need for affordable housing. Councilman Moore stated it was appropriate to give staff direction that would include all requests from individual Council members. Councilman Rindone referred to the Certificates of Compliance and the 800% increase and noted that although it appeared excessive it was because the fee had not been raised since adopted in 1974. He questioned whether staff had considered phasing in the fee. He also questioned whether the $10.00 for fmgerptinting was full cost recovery. Mr. Young stated it was a consideration that could be discussed with the Engineering Department. The Certificate of Compliance independent of an Adjustment Plat, which was another related service provided, was very infrequently requested. That was one of the reasons it had not been updated. The fee for fingerprinting was full cost recovery. Councilman Rindone stated it was his recollection that the alarm permits were $2.00 and the delinquency fee would be $.40 and questioned whether it covered administrative costs. Ms. Frutcher responded that the amount was in error and had been changed to 10% to be consistent. Counc~man Moore questioned whether the increase in dog license fees had been reviewed. Ms. Frutcher stated the proposed fee would be the lowest in the County and staff had worked with Animal Control. What staff was trying to do was encourage people to go with the one year license until the animal Minutes March 16, 1993 Page S had been spayed or neutered and then purchase a three year license which would cost the City the same to process. Councilman Moore stated he would like to see a breakdown of where and what the total fee increases would be for present businesses. He did not see where there should be cuts but Council needed to see staff responses to their questions. He could agree to a citizen's review group. Councilman Rindone stated staff had done a good job but the area of contention was the state of the economy. He felt there was value in looking at the timing of when the increases would be instituted. He requested that Council look at that argument seriously and felt there were more dollars in adjustments that needed to be made. Council should address the issue after the budget review. The intent of what the fees were xrying to do, i.e. save the general taxpayer from paying for specialized services, was appropriate but there was also a time when the adjustments should be made. Councilman Fox stated he was sympathetic to the arguments regarding the economy and the timeliness of the issue. Delaying the fees would have a negative impact in the long run by reflecting on the City as being anti-business. MSC (Nader/Moore) to continue the public hearing to the 3/23/93 Council meeting, with proper notice, and direct staff to supplement their report by addressing itpm~ raised by Council, specifically:. impacts on existing businesses that could be felt, positive/negative, from the proposed fee adjusnnents; and, what the effect would be ff Council imposed a partial moratorium on those fee increases that only affect low income housing or job creating business - the expected positive affect on the economy and the affordability on the one hand and the expected negative impact on City operations on the other. Approved 4-O-1 with Horton absent. 12. PUBLIC HEARING PCM93-14, PCZ93-H: CONSIDERATION OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR 90-02), GENFA1AL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AND PLANNED COMMUNITY PRE-ZOI~ FOR SAN MIGUEL RANCH - Development of up to 1,619 dwelling units and related uses is proposed on 2,590 acres. Staff recommends the public hearing be ooened. 1}ublic testimony taken and continued to 4/13/93. (Director of Planning) This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open. · David Nairne, 4350 La Jolla Village Drive, San Diego, CA, representing San Miguel Partners, stated he objected to the date the public hearing was being continued to, The 4/13/93 date had not been consented to by the applicant; they had expected it to be continued to 3/23/93. He then gave a brief history of the action taken by the Applicant and staff of the processing. The 4/13/93 date resulted in a hardship on the Applicant. The financing commitments on the project required action prior to the proposed hearing date. City Manager Goss stated he was sympathetic to their request and the 4/13/93 date had been recommended without knowledge of the impact upon the Applicant. The proper noticing had been done and the public hearing could be conducted on 3/23/93. He advised the Council the proposed agenda for 3/23/93 was extremely lengthy. · Toni Ingrassia, 4463 Acacia Avenue, Bonita, CA, representing the Sweetwater Community Planning Group, stated they had not been able to prepare a presentation for the meeting because they needed information regarding the EastLake project. They had attempted to obtain the information and had been shifted from departtnent to depathuent. She questioned why they had been unable to obtain the final conditions on the EastLake project. Robert Leiter, Director of Planning, responded that the Assistant Planning Director had recently received the referral and had made an attempt to contact Ms. Ingrassia. He would meet with Ms. Ingrassia after the meeting. Minutes March 16, 1993 Page 6 MS (Nader/Fox) continue the pubHe hearing to the 3/23/93 Counc~ meeting unless the public hearing had not or could not be legally noticed, ff not, staff would then be authorized to notice the public hearing for 4/13/93. Councilman Rindone stated he suggested 3/30/93 as a back-up rather than 4/13/93. In reviewing the memorandum from the City Manager outlining the seven items suggested for discussion he felt the only critical items were Nos. 1, 2, and 6. He requested staff review the other items on the 3/23/93 agenda to see if they could be placed on the 3/30/93 or 4/13/93 meeting. Mayor Nader stated the worksession already had two major complex issues scheduled and expressed concern on adding another major issue to the agenda. Councilman Rindone stated he would vote against the motion as he did not feel it was fair to delay the hearing for four weeks, he did support the other portion of the motion. Councilman Fox stated he would not support the motion due to the reasons given by Councilman Rindone. Mayor Nader stated one of the items for the 3/30/93 meeting was the sewer rate issue which would have a tremendous impact on all citizens and businesses. SUI~-n-i~FFE MOTION: (Rindone/Fox) continue the hearing to the meeting of 3/23/93, if the hearing had not been properly noticed, 3/30/93 would be a back-up date with the item being placed last on the ageixda. City Attorney Boogaard stated there was an Agency workshop/meeting on 4/1/93 which could be a back-up date for the hearing. AMENDMENT TO MOTION: (Pdndane/Fox) to change the back-up date of 4/1/93 at 6:00 p.m. Counc~man Moore stated staff had received input from Supervisor Bilbray and requested that information be forwarded to Council. VOTE ON MOTION: approved 4-0-1 with Horton absent. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS · Carolyn Butler, 97 Bishop Street, Chula Vista, CA, felt the issue of safety at the trolley stations needed to be addressed within the next thirty days. She had submitted an application for a position on a board/commission regarding transit and stated she wanted the job. Mayor Nader stated the committee she had applied for did not have a vacancy and therefore she could not be appointed. Ms. Butler stated she was aware there wasn't a vacancy but had been informed that a committee was being formed in order to obtain City input. Mayor Nader stated he had a meeting later in the week to review existing vacancies on the board/commissions with the Deputy City ClerlL At the current time there was no vacancy on the Transit Committee. Council had recently taken action that could affect the status of the committee and he needed to be apprised of the situation. · Riette Suzzette Ormond, 411 Keamey Street, Chula Vista, CA, felt a legal ordinance should be enacted regarding plants, trees, and other foliage that was a nuisance or danger to homeowners. MS (Nadff/Rindone) to refer Ms. Ormond's concerns and comments to staff for review. Minutes March 16, 1993 Page 7 City Attorney Boogaard stated it was an encroachment law or trespass item. It was generally a civil matter and Ms. Ormond had the right to go to court to require the neighbor to remove the encroaching object. Self- help remedy was possible as long as it did not breach the peace. He would not recommend that but would recommend that she pursue her civil rights for the removal of the encroaching object. George Ormond, 411 Kearney Street, Chula Vista, CA, stated there was no law or precedent. Councilman Moore stated he had looked at the situation and the limbs did extend over the fence. The City could find out what the civil courts said and recommended and relay that on to Ms. Ormond. City Attorney Boogaard stated his depa~ hnent could respond verbally within several days. Ms. Ormond asked if the City would help in resolving the issue if there was nothing on the books that could help to resolve the situation. Mayor Nader stated the City would have to look at that question. VOTE ON MOTION: approved 4-0-1 with Horton absent. BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS None submitted. ACTION ITEMS None submitted. ITEMS pUlJJ~.r} FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR Items pulled: none. The minutes will reflect the published agenda order. OTHER BUSINESS 13. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT(S) - None 14. MAYOR~ REPORT(S) a. Ratification of appointment: Cindy Burrascano - Resource Conservation Commission. MSC (Nader/Moore) to ratify the appointment of Cindy Burrascano to the Resource Conservation Comrni~ion. Approved 4-0-1 with Hotton absent. b. Mayor Nader stated he had artended the National League of Cities Conference in Washington D.C. and one of the leading topics was the President's economic program, which had potentially significant opportunities for the City. He also met with Congressman F~ner and the staff members for the two U.S. Senators and other federal officials. It was evident from the presentations and meetings that the prevailing mood in Washington was to look for ways to provide federal dollars to local communities to meet tinmet human needs and invest in infrastructure that could expand the long term job base. He hoped that a timely presentation would be prepared that would enable the City to take full advantage of the possible outcome of the President's plan. Environmental technology was also a hot topic. He hoped staff would continue in give high priority to taking whatever items of federal assistance that could aide the Task Force in bringing Minutes March 16, 1993 Page 8 new industry to the City and putting that before the congressional and senatorial representatives. The plan also included CDBG appropriations. The news in Sacramento was not good but the news in Washington appeared to be more promising. 15. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilwoman Horton a. Legislation ReQuiring Council Action - AB193 (Goldsmith) - Prevailing wage exemptions - SUPPORT - Continued from the meeting of 3/9/93. MS eqader/Fox) continue the item to the meeting of 3/23/93. City Attorney Boogaard stated the proposed legislation would treat general cities the same as Charter cities. The City had adopted that policy, through an ordinance, after his office had rendered an opinion. His office had been notified that the Department of Industrial Labor Standards supported the position even with respect to the Otay Valley Road project. The legislation was allowing other cities, non-Charter, to avail themselves the same privilege. He felt it would enhance the position of the Charter cities as it was only at the opinion stage and had not been legally tested. Mayor Nader questioned why the item was time sensitive. Dan Bientima, Legislative Analyst, responded there was a hearing on 3/17/93 at 1:00 p.m. and Assemblyman Jan Goldsmith wanted to seek support of all the cities in the County by the time they opened the hearing. Mayor Nader felt if the bill had a chance it would survive the hearing and the Council could still make their input known before the Legislature voted. At the moment he was not prepared to vote for the legislation but was also hesitant to vote against it without Councilmember Horton being present as she was Council's representative on the Legislative Committee. Councilman Rindone stated Councilmember Horton was supportive of the legislation. The reason the item had been continued was because Councilmember Fox had not had sufficient time to review the item when presented at the last meeting. Mayor Nader felt the City was getting into an area with broader ramifications that would affect the quality of life for a significant amount of the working population. He was concerned about wading into that area in order to support a principal about Charter Home Rule. Councfiman Fox shared Mayor Nader's concern over the impact it would have on workers. Councilmember Horton was asking Council to adopt a similar policy as adopted by Council on 4/7/92. Mayor Nader stated the policy adopted was to take alternative bids on a project on which there was a legal dispute on whether the prevafiing wage policy applied. He had supported the alternative bids. VOTE ON MOTION: failed 2-2-1 wilh Moore and Rindone opposed and Hor[on ab~enL MSF (Moore/Rindone) to accept f~aff recommendation. Failed 2-2-1 with Fox and Nader oppo~d and Hor~on ab~nt. Councilman Moore · Councilman Moore stated he had met with the presiding judge for the Juvenile Court and there would be an item on next week's agenda on graffiti and how to attack it. Minutes March 16, 1993 Page 9 ADJOURNMENT City Attomey Boogaard stated a proposal came in on 3/16/93 on the Appropriate Technologies case which he needed to discuss with Council in closed session. MSC ~lader/Moore} to find that the issue if Appropriate Technologie~ had ~ after the po~tlng of the Counc~ agenda and was therefore an emevgency item; Counc~ to meet in dosed session immediatp.]y following the RDA meeting to discuss Aptek IL Council recessed at 8:10 p.m. and reconvened in closed session at 9:07 p.m. to discuss: Pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - Aptek II vs. the City of Chula Vista. Approved 4-0-1 with Horton absent. ADJOURNMENT AT 9:47 P.M. to a Meeting for Interviews on March 22, 1993, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Conference Room and thence to the Regular City Council Meeting on March 23, 1993 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. A Special Joint Meeting of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency convened at 8:11 p.m. and adjourned at 8:57 p.m. Respectfully submitted, BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CMC, City Clerk Vicki C. Soderquist, Dep~u~ity Clerk