HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1993/07/13 MINLFFES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CIIY OF CHULA VISTA
Tuesday, July 13, 1993 Council Chambers
6:11 p.m. Public Services Building
CALL TO ORDER
1. ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: Councilmembers Fox, Horton, Moore, Rindone, and Mayor Nader
ALSO PRESENT: John D. Goss, City Manager; Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney; and Beverly
A. Authelet, City Clerk
2. PLEDGE OF .AIJ.F. GIANCE TO THE FLAG. SILENT PRAYER
3. APPROVAL OF MI~: June 3, 1993 (Special Worksession/Meeting of the City Council);
June 15, 1993 (City Council Meeting); June 22, 1993 (City Council Meeting); and June 22, 1993 (Special
Joint Meeting of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency)
MS C (Rindone/Moore) to approve the minutes of June 3, 1993, June 15, 1993, June 22, 1993 (City Counc~),
and June 2.2, 1993 (Joint Council/Redevelopment Agency) as presented. Approved 4-0-1 with Hotton
absent
4. SPECIAl. ORDERS OF THE DAY:
a. Oath of Office: Ricardo Jimenez - Human Relations Commission. Oath of Office was administered
by Deputy City Clerk Soderquist.
b. Proclaiming the month of July as 'Parks and Recreation Month' - The proclamation was presented
by Mayor Pro Tem Rindone to Bob Lind, Chair of the Parks and Recreation Commission.
c. Presentation of Certificates of Recognition to students from Irapuato, Mexico - Certificates were
presented by Mayor Pro Tem Rindone to Guadahpe Nayafro Miranda, M. Patricia Rodriguez Tellez-Giron.
Elizabeth Velasco Cruz, Vanesa Julierta Merino Reyes, Luz Angelica Gonzalez Segovia, and Francisco
Hem andes Delgado. Host families were asked to stand and be recognized. Kim Fox, representing Fran
Larsen, presented the students with Girl Scout Pins and Boy Scout badges.
d. Acknowledgemerit of 'Best Recycling Partnership Award' - The City received the award from the
County of San Diego in recognition of their leadership in coordinating public, private, and non-profit
parmerships to promote recycling. Athena Bradley, Chula Vista Conservation Coordinator, presented the
Mayor and Council with the Best Recycling Partnership Award.
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items pulled: 5c, 6, and 14)
BALANCE OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR OFFERED BY COUNCILMEMBER RINDONE, reading of the text
was waived, passed unanimously, with Item 7 continued to the meeting of 7/20/93.
Minutes
July 13, 1993
Page 2
5. WRI 1 I~IN COMMUNICATIONS:
a. Letter of resignation from the Resource Conservation Commission - Maureen McNair, 948 Monterey
Court, Chula Vista, CA 91911. It was recommended that the resignation be accepted and the City Clerk be
directed to post immediately according to the Maddy Act in the Clerk's Office and the Public Library.
b. Letter of resignation from the Parks and Recreation Commission - Clifford Roland, 1100 IndusttiaI
Blvd., I-6, Chula Vista, CA 91911. It was recommended that the resignation be accepted and the City Clerk
be directed to post immediately according to the Maddy Act in the Clerk's Office and the Public Library.
c. Letter requesting insurance requirements for cab companies be reduced to the same level as the
Metropolitan Transit Development Board - O.D. Hedrick, President, Red Cab Company of San Diego, P.O.
Box 437240, San Ysidro, CA 92143. It was recommended that this issue be considered when the report on
taxicab operations comes back to Council in August. Pulled from the Consent Calendar.
Mr. Hedrick requested that the reduction be accomplished before August since his insurance renewal was
due by August 15. The insurance was getting more difficult to obtain each year. It was easy to get
$300,000 but very difficult to get $500,000. Chula Vista was the only City requiring that much insurance.
MTDB and other agencies only required $50,000, $100,000, $300,000. ffhe could get his insurance lowered
to that rate, it would save Red Cab $20,000 per year. The other smaller cab companies had certificates
which stated they had 1/2 million, but it was doubtful that they did. The only way to know if they had that
amount was to review their insurance policy and no one required to see the policies.
Councilman Rindone asked if that was a conTect statement that the City did not require the policy.
Mr. Goss stated there was no one present who could that issue.
Councilman Rindone wanted it referred to staff. Mr. Hedrick was correct in that MTDB had a considerable
amount of problems validating the cabs at $3001000. They did require proof of that. He suggested staff look
at the $300,000 versus $500,000; and validation by obtaining a copy of the policy.
MSUC O!INDONE/NADER) to bring item back August 3, 1993.
d. Letter requesting waiver of assessments and fees - Bill Armstrong, Pastor, EastLake Community
Church, 1519 Via Hacienda, Chula Vista, CA 91913. Due to the significant staff work and meetings involved
in coordinating this request, it was recommended that the letter be referred to staff.
e. Letter requesting Council defer any action on the Multi-Species Conservation Program (MSCP)
Resolution of Intention - James E. Whalen, Chairman, Alliance for Habitat Conservation, 416 University
Avenue, Suite 200, San Diego, CA 92103. Staff concurs with the Alliance request for a public hearing on
this matter and recommends scheduling such a hearing in the next four to six weeks.
6. ORDINANCE 2561 REQUIRING RECOVERY OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE ADMINISTRATION FEES
IMPOSED BY SAN DIEGO COUNTY (fimt reading) - Commencing 7/1/92, under the auspices of a new State
law, the County has imposed a booking fee of $176 per criminal defendant arrested by our police
department. While we are protesting the amount of the fee and the authority to impose same in pending
litigation, adoption of the ordinance would create a means of collecting it from criminal defendants hooked
through the system during the pendency of the litigation if it eventually proves unsuccessful, and would
therefore protect our general fund from a possible large unaccrued liability. Staff recommends Council place
the ordinance on first reading and approve the resolution. (City Attorney) Pulled from the Consent
Calendar.
Minutes
July 13, 1993
Page 3
RESOLUTION 17167 APPROPRIATING AN ADDITIONAL $3,855 FOR THE CONTINUATION OF
THE BOOKING FEES LITIGATION - 4/5th's vote required.
7. RESOLUTION 17156 APPROVING AN EXTF2qSION OF THE AGRRRMENT WITH REMY AND
THOMAS FOR LEGAL CONSLILTING SERVICES FOR THE OTAY RANCH PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR TO EXECIFI'E SAID AGREFe3dFAVF - The agreement extension will provide continuing assistance in
reviewing the Otay Ranch EIR including the CEQA Findings, Statement of Overriding Consideration,
Mitigation Monitoring Program, and the staff report. Also, will provide continuation of meetings with staff
and coordination with Board of Supervisors/City Council on legal issues. Staff recommends approval of the
resolution. (Deputy City Manager Krempl)
Mayor Nader requested the item be continued for one week as Council had received the report late.
8. RESOLLrFION 17157 AUTHORIZING THE TEMPORARY USE OF LEGISLATIVE OFFICE FOR
INTERIM CITY ATFORNEY DEPARTMFANT USAGE DURING CONSTRUCTION, AND MAKING AN
APPROPRIATION THFA1EFOR - Pursuant to prior Council authorization, the expansion of the City Attorney's
office construction was about to be let out for public bid. During the construction period, it will be more
safe and conducive to the conduct of business if the City Attorney's office and staff, or part of them, could
relocate on an interim basis. Staff' recommends approval of the resolution. (City Attorney) 4/Sth's vote
requh-ed.
9. RESOLUTION 17158 APPROVINGTHEFIRSTEXTENSIONAGI~RRMENTFORTHECOMMUNHY
YOUTH CENTER OPERATING AGRF-RMENT - On 3/12/92, the City entered into a joint use agreement with
the Sweetwater Union High School District and the Boys and Girls Club for the operation and maintenance
of the Community Youth Center on "L" Street. A section of the agreement stipulates that the City will review
the operations of the Boys and Girls Club periodically, and that the City shall extend the term of the
agreement if the Club was providing appropriate services and support during their operating hours at the
Center. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Parks and Recreation)
10. RESOLUTION 17159 RESCINDING RESOLUTION 15323 AUTHORIZING AN EXCHANGE OF
PROPERTY WITH RANCHO DEL SUR PARTNERSHIP - On 9/26/89, Council approved an exchange of open
space property with the Rancho del Sur Partnership to facilitate the development of medical offices on
Telegraph Canyon Road in the Sunbow I development. The Partnership and a medical doctor are jointly
designing a medical center building on a triangular parcel of property along Telegraph Canyon Road. The
property from the Open Space District was required to meet a condition of parking from the Planning
Department. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Parks and Recreation and Director
of Public Works)
11. RESOLUTION 17160 ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR 'LIBRARY PARKING
LOT OVERLAY' - On 6/9/93, the Director of Public Works received sealed bids for "Library Parking Lot
Overlay" (LB-126). The work to be done consists of providing asphalt concrete material overlaying the
existing parking lot at the Chula Vista Library located at 361 "F" Street. The work also includes the removal
of alligatored pavement areas and replacement with asphalt concrete, restriping of the parking lot,
adjusnnent of water meter boxes, and replacement of existing roof drains. The low bidder was Superior
Ready Mix Concrete L.P. in the amount of $32,726. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director
of Public Works)
Minutes
July 13, 1993
Page 4
)
12. RESOLUTION 17161 ACCEPTINGBIDSANDAWARDINGCONTRACTFORTHECONSTRUCTION
OF ORANGE AVENUE AND FOURTH AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENTS (ST-1S1) - On 6/23/93, sealed bids
were received for the "Orange Avenue and Fourth Avenue Street Improvements" (ST-151). The work to be
done consists of the construction of curb, gutter and sidewalk, pavement widening, decorated and
landscaped medians, and traffic safety improvements. The low bidder was Granite Construction Company
in the amount of $333,968. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
13. RESOLUTION17162 APPROVING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE SAN DIEGO TRANSIT
CORPORATION (SDTC) AND THE CITY FOR UNIFIED TELEPHONE INFORMATION SYSTEM - On 6/19/80,
the South Coast Organization Operating Transit (SCOOT) entered into an agreement with San Diego Transit
Corporation (SDTC) for regional transit information service. The service provides Chula Vista Transit (CVT)
riders with information on CVT schedules and routes, and on other fixed route transit systems in San Diego
County including San Diego Transit and the Trolley. Since SCOOT was dissolved on 7/1/93, the agreement
for the service for the current fiscal year will be between the City and SDTC. The agreement continues CVT
participation in the regional service for Fiscal Year (FY) 1993/94 at a cost of $22,766, a 7.6% increase over
the FY 1992/93 cost of $21,146. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
14. REPORT PROPOSED DEBT SE:I'I~ BETWEEaN OGDEN ENVIRONMENTAL AND
ENERGY SERVICES AND BALDWIN VISTA ASSOCIATES REGARDING THE OTAY RANCH - Over the past
few months, Baldwin has fallen short in meeting its contractual obligation to Ogden Environmental as to
payments due. Negotiations have been ongoing over the last thirty days to arrive at an acceptable payment
schedule to eliminate the debt. A tentative agreement has been reached. The purpose of the report was to
request Council authorization, since the City was a parry to the three party agreement, to have City staff
implement the agreement. It was recommended that Council authorize staff to execute a payment agreement
with Baldwin Vista and Ogden Environmental to address the Otay Ranch debt. (Deputy City Manager
Krempl) Pulled from the Consent Calendar.
Continued to the 7/20/93 meeting.
15. REPORT UPDATE ON STATUS OF IMPIZMENTATION AND IMPACTS OF AB 408
(DECRIMINALIZATION OF PARKING VIOLATIONS) - AB 408 became effective 7/1/93. The report describes
the steps taken to comply with AB 408 provisions and the specific impacts on the City's parking citation
program. ITEM HAS BE. FANI PUIJ.ED AT STAFF'S REOUEST AND SUBIVII'I'fED TO COUNCIL AS AI~
INFORMATION ITEM. (Director of Finance)
* * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * *
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
16. PUBLIC HEARING AIrlENDING THE 1993/94 BUDGET TO ACCOUNT FOR REVENUE
REDUCTIONS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA - On 6/15/93, Council adopted the 1993/94 operating
budget with the understanding that the budget would be revisited after the State adopted its budget and
the impact of the State revenue cuts on the City were known. Staff recommends adoption of the revised
budget. (Administration)
RESOLUTION 17163 AMENDING THE 1993/94 BUDGET TO ACCOUNT FOR REVENUE
REDUCTIONS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
City Manager, John Goss, presented the staff report using overheads. The net loss projected from the State
budget cut was $540,000. If the voters did not extend the 1/2 cent sales tax in November, then it became
Minutes
July 13, 1993
Page S
$709,000. He was recommending a combination of some slight revenue adjustments as well as reductions
in the budget itself amounting to $540,000. If the voters did not extend the 1/2 cent sales tax, he would
come back to Council at that time. The results of the State budget cuts had done the following: 1) it would
mean that the sales tax would go up slightly based on receiving the 1/2 cent sales tax for 6 months; 2}
property tax would go down from $9 million to approximately $7.7 million; 3) motor vehicle in-lieu tax
would go up; and 4) the net result would mean a $540,000 reduction. He recommended Council adopt the
budget as recommended, remove the hiring freeze, and give consideration to the three reclassifications
presented in the report.
Councilman Rindone stated he had a concern regarding the potential ad]ustment of the $540,000, there was
$132,000 of that from the Police Department which was in excess of 20 percent of the proposed cuts.
Although he went over the budget thoroughly, he was still concerned and felt it should be re-examined. He
asked staff to respond to the question that if the budget was in the neighborhood of $65-66,000 instead of
the $132,000 what the impact would be. He was specifically concerned about the cap on the overtime. No
on could predict what emergencies may occur.
Mr. Goss responded that when the reduction in the Police Department was presented to him, it was in the
amount of $171,000. He pared it down to $132,000.
Richard Emerson, Police Chief, stated all of the employees in the Police Department had been working hard
on the overtime. They had about a $350,000 shift in the overtime expenditures because of some increased
management of overtime. He had talked to the City Manager about the ability to adjust at the end of the
year if needed. If the $45,000 was added back into their budget, they would utilize it specifically to deal
with some of the proactive measures in the Police Department dealing with crime and quality of life. Also,
by adding additional officers, they would need some additional training. Probably the biggest savings from
last year was the way they presented the gang alternative program at the elementary schools. Previously,
it had been done on an overtime basis. However, last year, they attempted to use a light duty officer.
Because he had been injured, he could not do this. So they used one of their gang officers instead which
saved about $40,000. The monies could be used on overtime for off-duty personnel which would allow the
on-duty individuals to work on their specific programs. They had managed overtime very tightly; there may
be some changes in the MOU that may make some changes. He concluded by stating that if Council was
looking for one account which would be modified in their budget reductions, it would be the overtime
account.
Councilman Rindone stated he was uncomfortable with that area. The Chief and staff should be commended
for their judicious effort in the reduction and allocation of the work force. Yet, he did not feel Council
should tie their hands. The return of the $4S,000 overtime, did not necessarily mean it would be spent.
He asked the Chief to explain the benefits of Arjis, another account which had been reduced.
Chief Emerson replied that Arjis was the Automated Regional dustice Information System. Each police
agency in San Diego County was involved in the joint powers agreement. It was the records management
system throughout the County. They had looked at the Arjis transactions and felt that they could make cuts
in that account. It would take them to the bare bones, but that was the impression they had that those
types of cuts needed to be made. The total cuts would be $2,500 in one account and about $12,500 in
another account.
Councilman Moore stated he was the representative on Arjis because it was a spin off of SANDAG. It was
a program which we needed. Membership was based on a set fee and the other cost was usage of the
computer time. What the Chief was doing was cutting down the usage of computer time.
Chief Emerson stated they were looking at doing some of the entering of the data on off-peak hours because
there was a substantial reduction. There were some employee concerns about working at midnight, but they
felt it would be better to do that than get into personnel layoffs. San Diego Processing agreed they needed
to utilize batch loading and were redesigning the system.
Minutes
July 13, 1993
Page 6
Councilman Rindone stated that when you look at restoring something, you had to look at reducing
something to keep the budget in balance. He stated there were some positions, such as a vacant clerical
position in Administration at a salary of $26,900; a Plans Checker in Building and Housing frozen from 6
months to 12 months with a savings of $48,400; possible adjustment or delay in the Mainframe Computer
Programmer for 6 months for another $7,500 savings; another $28,600 savings for not filling for 9 months
the Engineering Aide. Although it was not the City Council's responsibility to dot the "i" and cross the
since it should be the responsibility of the City Manager, he was proposing the budget be balanced.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open.
· Nancy Bizzari, 416 Third Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, was not present when called to the podium.
· Joseph Garcia, 484 Fifth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, felt there should be more patrol cars in the
vicinity of the Chula Vista Shopping Center. More of the unmarked police cars should be used as marked
patrol cars for patrolling in the City. He wanted to know what the City was acquiring through the asset
seizure funds.
City Manager Goss replied that the City received about $40,000 each year in asset seizure
There being no further public testimony, the public hearing was closed.
M 0~.indone) to approve Resolution 17163 (adoption of the amended 1993-94 budget) and the elimination
of the hiring freeze with one amendment to include instead of a $132,000 cut in the Police Department
budget, it would be only $72,000 (returning the previously anticipated cut of $60,000 for the police overlime
and two accounts for Arjis) and that the City Manager be given discretion for balancing the $60,000 in any
of the other ways he had suggested or as he fdt appropriate.
Mayor Nader asked if it could be put in the form of an amendment rather than a motion to adopt the
resolution with that amendment. There could be other amendments to consider as well.
Councilman Rindone had no problem with that.
Councilman Fox stated he would second the motion with the understanding that the three goals Council had
reaffirmed would also be kept in mind when the City Manager used his discretion.
MS (Rindone/Fox) to restore the $60,000 to the Police Department budget.
Mayor Nader asked if it was Councilman Rindone's intent that if the Police Chief was successful in
economizing in those areas during the coming fiscal year, funds would remain in his budget to use at his
discretion in other ways that would enhance public safety.
Councilman Rindone replied that hoped so because that would be a continuation of good management.
Councilman Moore stated that he did not like to tinker with the budget where you restore money or add
money and leave it up to the Department Head discretion. The City had a management team and it should
go through the management team, not individual department heads.
Mr. Goss stated those were estimates, but there were times where there were under estimates in some
accounts and overages in other accounts. There was flexibility to make adjustments during the course of
the year. If the Chief saved in overtime, but the Arjis costs went up, then the Manger's office would approve
a transfer of funds between accounts. It was done in the Operating and Maintenance accounts.
Mayor Nader stated the only area where he would add any funding was included in the motion on the floor.
There were a number of areas where funding should be cut or restricted, such as: freezing the Engineering
Minutes
July 13, 1993
Page 7
Supervisory position and the Administrative clerical position; further cuts in the Planning Department which
was included in his memo to Council last month; maintaining the freeze on reclassifications that was
enacted last month instead of repealing it as recommended by the City Manager; and, implementing a more
extensive program of energy conservation similar to the one proposed in the Police Department.
Councilman Fox expressed that the $50,000 cut in the Planning Department could possibly have an effect
on the Youth Action Program.
Councilwoman Horton stated she would have a problem cutting $50,000 from the Planning budget.
Mr. Goss stated there was currently no vacancy for a Senior Civil Engineer as indicated in the staff report;
that was an error. There was a Senior Civil Engineer who was working on the Otay Ranch project and that
the position had to be revisited in terms of work load and whether it was going to continue to be Eftled as
the City started processing the Otay Ranch specific plans. There were several positions, including a clerical
position in Administration that were vacant which they had recommended be backfilled with part-time hours
for six months. It was suggested by Councilman Rindone that it be extended to twelve months. There was
also a clerical position in Finance and Public Works in that same category.
Councilman Rindone responded that it would be at the City Manager's discretion unless there was a
consensus of the Council of some other areas that were currently being suggested for consideration which
may impact the necessity for that.
VOTE ON MOTION: approved tmanimously.
Mayor Nader felt the $32,000 cut in Planning could be accomplished by cross training and consolidating
functions.
MS CNader/Rindone) to add an additional $32,000 cut in the Planning Department.
Councilman Moore stated he could not support that. He did not know enough about the Planning
Department.
Councilman Fox felt he could not support the motion because the staff report stated that further reductions
in the Planning budget would impact services. One of the primary goals in dealing with the budget was that
it not impact service levels.
Mayor Nader responded that if the funds were deleted from the Planning Department budget, they are still
available for the Youth Action program. There was no possible impact to the Youth Action program from
this motion.
VOTE ON MOTION: failed 2-3 with Fox, Hotton, Moore opposed.
MS (hlader, a-lorton) to freeze the Engineering Supervisor position and the one der/cal position in
/~dmlnistration, keep the reclassitica~on freeze, and direct the City Manager to institute an energy
conservation program throughout the City similar to the one proposed for the Police Deparl~nent~
Mr. Goss stated he assumed the interpretation would be if any of the Engineering Supervisory positions
became vacant that they be frozen.
Mayor Nader stated that was correct.
Councilman Moore stated that if they cut out a Supervising Engineer and someone staffed doing his work,
and if that work was beyond what he was hired for, then you have to reclassify him. He felt Council was
tinkering with Administration and felt Council should not be doing that.
Minutes
July 13, 1993
Page 8
Mayor Nader felt differently because the State had chosen three years in a row steal money from the City,
and as policy makers they were within bounds and duties to give some direction to Administration.
Mayor Nader withdrew the portion of his motion which dealt with the Engineering Supervisor.
Councilman Moore stated he still had a problem with the clerical and wanted to bifurcate that port/on from
the motion.
BIlrORCATED MOTION: (Nader/Horton) to freeze the one clerical position in Administration. Motion carried
4-1 with Moore opposed.
BIFURCATED MOTION: CNader/Horton) to direct the City Manager to institute an energy conservation
program throughout the City similar to the one proposed for the Police Department. Approved unan/monsly.
BIFURCATED MOTION: (Nader/Horton) to keep the redassification freeze. Approved 3-2 with Moore and
Rindone opposed.
RESOLUTION 17163, AS AMENDED, OFFERED BY COUNCILMAN RINDONE, reading of the text was waived,
passed and approved unanimously.
The hour being past 10:30 p.m,, the Council took the following vote: MSUC ('Nader/Rindone) to complete
the public hearings, item 5c, oral communication, the Redevelopment Agency agenda, and the dosed session
it~rn~ and to continue the remaining agenda to July 20th.
17. PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERATION OF AN INCREASE IN SEWER SERVICE CHARGES - As
a member of the San Diego Area Wastewater Management District (SDAWMD), the City was required to
participate in its operations, maintenance, and upgrade program. Due to the increased cost of upgrading
regional wastewater transporeation, treatment, and disposal, it was necessary to raise the sewer service
charges for Fiscal Year 1993/94. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
4/5th's vote required.
RESOLUTION 17164 APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE MASTER FEE SCIF_,DULE ON
SEWER SERVICE CHARGES AND TRANSFER OF $1,8S6,000 FROM FUND 222 TO FUND 22S
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open,
· Joseph Garcia, 484 Fifth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, urged Council to lower the rate for low income
people to about $4 to $6 per billing period instead of the $11 per month. He stated the sewer fund should
be a bank to fund other City services such as voice mail. He felt that if there were reserves, it should be
used to lower fees.
MSC (Nader/Moore) to continue the public heazing to July 20, 1993. Motion earfled 4-O-1 with Horton
absent from the dlas.
18. PUBLIC HEARING CITY OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 10 FOR FISCAL YEAR
1993/94 - Based upon the advice of the City Attorney, the public hearing for Open Space Maintenance
District 10 has been separated due to conflict of interest. In accordance with the City Municipal Code
Section 17.07, the City Engineer prepared reports on the spread of assessments for the Open Space Districts.
The reports were accepted, and the required public hearings were set by Council at their meetings of
Minutes
July 1B, 1993
Page 9
5/25/93 and 6/1/93. Staff recommends Council open the public hearing, take testimony, and continue the
pubic hearing to the meeting of 7/20/93. (Director of Public Works)
Councilman Fox left the dias due to a conflict of interest.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open.
· Nancy Bizzarri, 416 Third Avenue, Chula Vista, 91910, was not present when called.
There being no public testimony, the public hearing closed. The second public hearing will be held on July
20, 1993.
19. PUBLIC HEARING CITY OPEN SPACE MAI~ANCE DISTRICT NUMBERS 1-9, 11, 14, 1S,
17, 18, 20, 24, 26, AND BAY BOULEVARD, FASTlAKE AND TOWN CENTER MAINTENANCE D[ST~CTS FOR
FISCAL YEAR 1993/94 - Based upon the advice of the City Attorney, the public hearing for Open Space
Maintenance District 10 has been separated due to conflict of interest. In accordance with the City
Municipal Code Section 17.07, the City Engineer prepared reports on the spread of assessments for the Open
Space Districts. The reports were accepted, and the required public hearings were set by Council at their
meetings of 5/25/93 and 6/1/93. Staff recommends Council open the public hearing, take testimony, and
continue the pubic hearing to the meeting of 7/20/93. (Director of Public Works)
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open.
· Porfirio Campos, 1778 Hampton Court, 91902, was not present when called.
· Nancy Bizzarri, 416 Third Avenue #10, 91910, was not present when called.
· Charles Fanno, 1214 Corte de Vela, 91910, was not present when called. He did submit a letter
which will be on file in the Clerk's Office.
There being no further public testimony, the public hearing was closed. The second public hearing m be
on July 20, 1993.
Councilman Moore requested a memo from staff regarding why the fee was high on Districts 26 and 28.
20. PUBL[C HEARING CONSIDERATION OF GRANTING A FRANCHISE TO LAIDLAW WASTE
SYSTEMS, INC. FOR MULTI-FAMILY RECYCLING COI.I.ECTION SERVICES -On 6/22/93, Council approved
a resolution giving notice of intent to grant a franchise for the multi-family recycling program collection
services to be provided by Laidlaw Waste Systems and setting 7/13/93 as the date for the public hearing,
As directed, staff has noticed the public hearing in conformance with the Charter required process for
granting a franchise. Staff recommends Council place the ordinance on first reading. (Administration)
ORDINANCE 2562 GRANTING A FRANCHISE TO LAIDLAW WASTE SYSTEMS, INC. FOR
MULTI-FAMILY RECYCLING COLLECTION SERVICES (tint reading)
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open.
· George l,azaruk, 199 1/2 Mace Street, 91911, felt it should go out to bid; that the City could do
better although he did feel that Laidlaw's package was a good one.
Athena Bradley, Conservation Coordinator, responded that Laidlaw had a good package. She did not feel
the City could come up with a better deal by putting it out to bid. According to the ordinance, the City had
an obligation to Laidlaw to negotiate with them. If they offered a package which was good for the City, the
Minutes
July 13, 1993
Page 10
City needed to show why we would not want that package and what was wrong with it. She did not feel
there was anything wrong with their package. It was a separate contract, and the City could break the
contract within five years without just cause.
There being no further public comments, the public hearing was closed.
Councilman Rindone wanted stuffs reassurance of the ability to bifurcate the franchise fee review of the
contract, especially if it came up with other contracts in the future so that if the City chose not to extend
or increase the percentage for the franchise fee then the ffanchisee would not be penalized for that and
future Councils would be able to make a separate judgement on that.
Ms. Bradley responded that it was her understanding. It was difficult because of the accounting, but it could
be done. It was Councfl's direction at the last meeting.
Bruce Boogaard, City Attorney, stated that the franchise fee increase must be approved by Council.
ORDINANCE 2562 WAS OFFERED BY RINDONE, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved
unanimously.
21. PUBLIC HEARING CONDITIONALUSEPERMITPCC-93-39; REQUESTTOESTABLISHSHORT-
TERM TRANSITIONAL HOUSING FOR HOM~-I .RSS FAMILIES UP TO FORTY-FOUR PEOPLE AT 31 FOURTH
AVENUE - SODTH BAY COMMUNITY SERVICES - South Bay Community Services is proposing to establish
a short-term transitional housing project for homeless families for a maximum o f forty-four tenants in family
groups and one resident manager at an existing apartment complex located at 31 Fourth Avenue. The
complex consists of twelve one-bedroom units and two two-bedroom units. Staff recommends approval of
the resolution. (Director of Planning)
RESOLUTION 17165 APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-93-39, A REQ~ TO
ESTABLISH A SHORT-TERM, TRANSITIONAL HOUSING PROJECT AT 31 FOURTH AVENUE IN THE R-3
ZONING DISTRICT
Councilmember Rindone stated he would abstain from participation due to property ownership adjacent to
the proposed project.
Chris Salomone, Director of Community Development, stated Council had seen the project in conceptual form
and had conceptually approved the funding for the project which triggered the application for the CUP. Staff
would be coming back in the future, possibly next week, with funding for the project.
Juan Arroyo, Housing Coordinator, stated the site was proposed due to its location, proximity to
transportation, shopping, and recreation. The size of the site was manageable and the size of the project
was appropriate for the need and area. The selection was also based on economic feasibility and the
flexibility of the seller. The property had been appraised twice at $750,000 and was being offered below
appraised value by $30,000. Concerns raised by residents opposing the project related to economic impact,
land use compatibility, traffic, etc. were addressed by the CUP and the requirements and conditions.
Councilmember Fox stated Council had received a letter stating an EIR should be conducted due m the
increase in number of residents from thirty-four to forty-four and questioned how it was addressed by CEQA.
Barbara Reid, Associate Planner, stated the letter from Paul Robinson and a letter of response was included
in Council's packet. The one new impact he had not discussed at the Planning Commission was access and
the various departments that reviewed the proposal did not feel there would be access problems.
Councilmember Horton stated Mr. Robinson's letter referred to a problem with drainage on the property.
Minutes
July 13, 1993
Page 11
Ms. Reid stated originally the Mitigated Negative Declaration identified a potential impact from inadequate
drainage in the courtyard area. Staff went on site and the Engineering Department felt there could be a
problem with ponding in the event of heavy rains but was something that could be dealt with easily by
lowering the soil in the landscaping containers. It was not an environmental impact because it was an
existing situation. It was the intention that it be corrected if the CUP was approve&
Councilmember Horton stated it appeared that the parking ratios for the City were better than comparable
projects in North County and questioned whether staff had contacted other cities to see if there were
problems with the ratios.
Steve Griffin, Senior Planner, responded that staff did contact other jurisdictions and they had indicated
general satisfaction with the parking at the facilities.
Mayor Nader questioned whether the proposed use involved any increase in density over the existing use.
It was his understanding that a CUP was required because Southbay Community Services would be limiting
how long a tenant could remain a resident.
Robert Leiter, Director of Planning, responded that it did not involve increased density. A CUP was required
due to the time limitation for residents and also because of services that would be provided to the clients.
Mayor Nader stated the Resource Conservation Commission had recommended approval on a 6-0 vote with
a condition that there be an annual review of the project by the City to assure that it was complying with
all other conditions. Presumably, that could mean that the CUP could be revoked if the annual review
showed they were not complying with the conditions.
Mr. Griffin stated that was correct. The resolution contained a condition that had the zoning administrator
reviewing the permit on an annual basis. If problems occurred it could be forwarded to the Commission and
on to the Council.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open.
Those speaking in opposition of the project and granting of the CUP due to location of project, safety,
increase number of homeless in the area, and cost of property were:
· Barbara Orsa, 21 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, stated the ponding was an existing condition on
the roof and not on the property; business and apartment owners should be contacted in trying to help with
the homeless situation.
· Regina Hiekey, 21 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, felt the Planning report was filled with incorrect
information.
· Paul E. Robinson, 700 Front Street, San Diego, CA, representing Hart & Barbara Klein; Klein Family
Trust; Alan and Lavonne Brant; Brant Family Trust, property owners adjacent to the proposed project, stated
they had many concems regarding the process. The majority of their concerns were with the environmental
process, i.e. a negative declaration. He did not feel the concerns raised at the Planning Commission had
been adequately addressed. There would be an increase in intensity of use, a regular and continuous
turnover of residents, there would be vans and shuttles at the site on a regular basis, there would be many
civic groups offering services at the site, and there would also be a number of social outreach programs
visiting the program on a regular basis. Those were not typical characteristics of an apartment complex and
were not characteristics of the complex that was currently there. Vv'hen added with the fact that, since the
apartment complex was constructed, circumstances and conditions had changed dramatically, both of those
dictated that a more thorough environmental process be conducted. There were two issues that should be
focused on: 1) access, the access to the project was by way of a private easement that served five other
properties and would be a liability for the City; and 2) it was not a good deal for the City.
Councilmember Fox stated it was his understanding that Mr. Robinson was stating the environmental
document was inadequate for two reasons: 1) the increase in the intensity of the use and the uses associated
Minutes
July 13, 1993
Page 12
)
with the nature of the business; and 2) because the use was changing from apartments to the proposed use
and the consequences associated with that use.
Mr. Robinson felt the most important item was the characteristics of the present use versus the proposed
use. Staff made many of their decisions on the two uses and that they were so similar that there was no
change.
Councilmember Fox questioned whether Mr. Robinson could site in CEQA his reasons why the existing
document was inadequate and why the City should go to the EIR process.
Mr. Robinson responded that the arguments had been given in lay terms and he did not have CEQA in front
of him. When there was a change in use and a change in circumstances since the original project was built,
CEQA "cried" for public input of very detailed analyzation and public input to give the Council all the facts
necessary to make an informed choice. If Council would trail the item he would prepare a brief citing the
CEQA sections.
Truman Brooks, 3404 Bonita Road, Chula Vista, CA, representing Hart Klein owner of property
immediately south of the proposal and had access through the easement of the property, stated he had two
areas he wanted to address: 1) value of the subject property; and 2) the impact of the easement on the value
of the subject property. His analysis suggested that the City was paying a premium for the property in a
range from $225,000 to $250,000 over current market values. In a time of fewer dollars to meet government
demands and the distressed market condition it did not appear in the best interests of the citizens to be
considering paying a premium for the properties. The 5/7/92 appraisal report failed to take into
consideration the easement and indicated that the price had already been negotiated and was a pending
escrow at the time of appraisal. It appeared that the intent was to support the price the City had negotiated
rather than appraise the property as to its current value. The 2/24/93 Letter of Update indicated that there
had been no change in the properties value which appeared to be inconsistent with what had happened in
the marketplace. It was his opinion that the City was unnecessarily paying a premium and he felt there
were a number of sellers in the community that would be happy to enter into a contract with the City at
a more affordable price. He also believed the City could find a property that was not impacted by an
easement.
Councilmember Fox questioned whether there was anything else wrong with the appraisal dated 2/24/93.
Mr. Brooks responded that he did not find any other inconsistencies, it was a complete report. He was not
aware of any apartment complex that had a similar easement.
Councilmember Horton questioned whether Mr. Brooks had taken into consideration the amenifies and
characteristics of the property that were different than the sales used for the comparables.
Mr. Brooks responded that he had not, as it would not typically be something that would be considered in
an appraisal and would be buyers motivation.
Mayor Nader questioned whether the City was paying a commission on the property.
Mr. Arroyo responded that the City would not be paying a commission, the seller would pay the commission.
· Sylvia Armenta, 330 "D" Street, Chula Vista, CA, felt the north section of the City had provided their
fair share of community service projects. The community should be well balanced and all service providers
should not be located in just one area of the community.
· Martina Mays, 31 Fourth Avenue #8, Chula Vista, CA, stated she had not been notified of the public
hearing. She had been informed that the petitions distributed stated the buildings were not occupied. She
felt the project should utilize an empty building.
Minutes
July 13, 1993
Page 13
Mayor Nader questioned the notification area.
Mr. Leiter responded that notices had been mailed to all property owners within a 1,000 foot radius of the
property. Speakers at the Planning Commission hearing were also notified.
Mayor Nader stated the petitions received did not make the claim that the building was vacant. It was his
understanding there was a Council policy that property owners and tenants would be notified of public
hearings.
Mr. Leiter stated it was staffs understanding that the policy applied to properly owners only. Notice was
mailed to those that spoke at the Planning Commission meeting which included several tenants.
Mayor Nader requested that staff go back and check the policy which he felt had been instituted during the
Rancho del Rey hearings. If after checking, it was still staffs understanding that only the property owners
were to be notified, he wanted the policy agendized for Council review. It had been his intent that the City
would go beyond the requirements of the State law.
Councilmember Horton questioned whether Chula Vista or Southbay Community Services would assist in
relocation.
Mr. Arroyo responded that the budget proposed by Southbay Community Services included relocation
assistance to address all needs.
· Joseph Garcia, 484 Fifth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, felt the property should be reappraised. He
questioned whether it would be more advisable to establish a fund with the proposed funds to help
individual homeless people.
· Terry Keith, 67 Fourth Avenue #H, Chula Vista, CA, stated he had not been notified of the meeting.
He felt the use of the Navel Training Center should be investigated as a possible location for a homeless
project.
· Dub Hicks, 161 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, felt the north area of Chula Vista was overloaded
with social service projects. He also expressed concern regarding increased traffic.
· Marcella Gomez, 135 Guava Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, stated she did not receive notice of the public
hearing. She felt the human factors should be considered. She questioned where the funds were coming
from for the project and the future of the project due to funding constraints. She felt further study should
be done.
· Ricardo Acorta, 47 Fourth Avenue #L, Chula Vista, CA, Manager of Park Vista Apartments, stated
in the past two months, after being honest with all his tenants, he had twelve vacancies for August which
was the highest he had in four years. He questioned why the funds could not be used to rent apartments
and stated they were willing to work with the families regarding deposits. The Manager at 31 Fourth
Avenue was also opposed to the project but had been told not to speak.
· Joe D. Casillas, 1060 Calma Drive, Chula Vista, CA, Chairman of the Housing Advisory Committee,
stated the Housing Advisory Committee voted against the project for the following reasons: 1) concern
regarding the development of a balanced community; 2) protection of residences of quality of life; and 3)
encouragement of private sector to participate in the solution of local and regional housing issues and the
development of innovative concepts for provision of affordable housing.
Councilmember Horton questioned why the Committee felt the location or facility was inadequate. She
noted there was a courtyard on the facility.
Mr. Casillas responded that there was not an area for children and they felt there was a safety hazard in
crossing the road to the park. Based on the Housing Element of the General Plan, they felt north Chula Vista
would be saturated with those types of activities. In doing a fiscal impact they felt the price for the property
was out of range when there were other properties in the community. They also felt the amount of research
Minutes
July 13, 1993
Page 14
done to locate the facility had been inadequate and that the proposal was not creative. The Committee
recommended that a Task Force be formed to find other property.
Mayor Nader noted it was a seven member committee and a 3-2 vote would indicate no position. Two other
City commissions reviewed the project and voted unanimously for it. He agreed that the long term answer
was to balance such projects throughout the City. Such a facility had been identified as one of the most
pressing needs in the community at the Housing Summit and other properties were mentioned. It was his
understanding that Mr. Casillas was going to check those properties out and report back to staff.
Mr. Casillas did not feel the research went far enough and that one of the better places to have worked on
it would have been the Resolution Trust Corporation and banks in the area. It was his understanding that
other properties were now on the market. He felt there was a lot of unfinished business in the Housing
Element of the General Plan.
· Sandrina Tarasuck. 149 Fourth Avenue #16, Chula Vista, CA, representing Chula Vista Townhouse
Association
· Frances R. Finnerty, 139 Fourth Avenue #7, Chula Vista, CA, representing Chula Vista Townhouse
Association
· Ruth Piazzoni, 139 Fourth Avenue #5, Chula Vista, CA, representing Chula Vista Townhouse
Association
· Donald E. Stell, 210 Sea Vale Street, Chula Vista, CA, felt the attendant restrictions on the homeless
families were impossible to implement.
· Marian Norton, 321 Kimball Terrace, Chula Vista, CA.
· Nancy Bizzarri, 416 Third Avenue #lO, Chula Vista, CA, felt the resolution had been drafted with
with numerous errors.
Those speaking in support of the project and CUP were:
· Maggie Helton, 162 Mankato Street, Chula Vista, CA, Member of the Housing Advisory Committee,
stated the project was not duplicated in the community and was needed. The program was well planned,
designed for families, and had definite regulations.
Council recessed at 8:30 p.m. and reconvened at 8:44 p.m.
Those speaking in support of the project and CUP were:
· Kathryn hembo, 315 Fourth Avenue #E, Chula Vista, CA, Executive Director of Southbay Community
Services, gave a brief background of Southbay Community Services and the project. The project would have
a full-time resident manager and services would be provided to the residents off-site. The cost to the City
in the first year was $2,395/per person, over the first five years it would be reduced to $479/per person.
Donations from private donors exceed $56,000.
· Dan Marcus, 315 Fourth Avenue #E, Chula Vista, CA, representing Southbay Community Services,
stated four experienced property management companies had been interviewed and a local group, Monfrick
Inc., had been chosen. An on-site property manager would be hired and would work with a full-time case
manager and half-time program director employed by Southbay Community Services. He had meet with Ms.
Mays three times regarding the project and relocation and had met with every other family living there at
least once and some as many as five times. Southbay Community Services was insuring that all families
would be treated fairly by utilizing the Uniform Relocation Act. Representatives from HUD were assisting
Southbay Community Services with the relocations. Southbay Community Services was working with
Community Development staff and County of San Diego, Housing and Community Development staff, to
obtain Section 8 certificates for eligible families. The current facility had a number of children living there
and there would not be any change when the project was established. He then reviewed the programs that
would be available for the youth.
Minutes
July l3, 1993
Page 1S
Councilmember Fox stated the Resource Conservation had approved the project with four recommendations
and questioned whether Southbay Community Services accepted the conditions.
Mr. Marcus responded that all the issues had been discussed in depth and had been addressed.
· Rich Juarez, 140 West Sixteenth Street, National City, CA, representing the MAAC Project, stated
they were committed to providing support services to the project.
· Carolyn F. J. Butler, 97 Bishop Street, Chula Vista, CA, felt a solution could be reached by working
with Bob Casey regarding the project for homeless families.
· Glenn Allison, 3776 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, Executive Director of Episcopal Community
Services, stated they were committed to providing support services to the project.
· Nancy Servatius, 315 Fourth Avenue #E, Chula Vista, CA, spoke in support of the project. She read
a letter from Anita Landrum who had signed a petition against the project and wished to let the Council
know that she had been misinformed of what the project would be and was no longer in opposition.
· Miguel Gonzales, 163 Guava, Chula Vista, CA, stated he had not received notification of the public
hearing.
· Carolyn Williams, 4446 Vista Nacion Drive, Chula Vista, CA.
· Violetta Ochoa, Sandstone, Chula Vista, CA.
· Wayne Zachery, 275 "C" Street, Chula Vista, CA, stated there was a need for such a service but
questioned whether it was the best use of the funds available.
Those in support of the project and CUP but not wishing to speak were:
· Maria Martinez, 12254 Broadway ,4/412, Chula Vista, CA
· Estela Lemos, 76 Oaklawn, Chula Vista, CA
· Guadalupe Auken, 546 Flower, Chula Vista, CA
· Susie Dacy, 398 "H" Street, Chula Vista, CA, representing Household Bank
· Emerald Randolph, P. O. Box 17, Jamul, CA, representing Chula Vista Human Services Council
· Brad Burke, 711 Eighth Avenue, San Diego, CA
· Honey Burke, 2048 W. California Street, San Diego, CA
· Lillie Barnes, 1917 Morena Boulevard, Chula Vista, CA
· Robert Lally, 299 17th Street, San Diego, CA, representing Alpha Project
· Zeriesus Ries, no address given.
· Glen Googins, 2360-C Greenbriar, Chula Vista, CA
· Paul Reeves, 1935 Gotham, Chula Vista, CA
· Fred C. Zajicek, 540 Flower Street, Chula Vista, CA
· Jennifer Bruno, 430 Montgomery Street, Chula Vista, CA
· Carlos Amaya, 1515 Hilltop Drive, Chula Vista, CA
· Cesar Canizaks, 568 Jefferson Avenue, Chula Vista, CA
· Bella Hurbace, 1515 Hilltop Drive, Chula Vista, CA
· Victor Manuel Moreno, 1515 Hilltop Drive, Chula Vista, CA
· Tamra Heaps, 152 Sierra Way, Chula Vista, CA
· Robert Etherington, 876 Hazy Glen Court, Chula Vista, CA, representing LDS Rehabilitation Services
· Michelle Mizeaelin, 1515 Hilltop Drive, Chula Vista, CA
· Desiree Valdez, 1515 Hilltop Drive, Chula Vista, CA
· Tamera Myers, 1515 Hilltop Drive, Chula Vista, CA
· Wayne A. Bruno, 430 Montgomery Street, Chula Vista, CA
· Walt Rhodes, "H" and Fourth Streets, Chula Vista, CA, representing Household Bank
· Danah S. Bransford, 966 Paseo Del Paso, Chula Vista, CA
· Jack Bransford Jr., 966 Paseo Del Paso, Chula Vista, CA
· Diane E. Nissen. 1405 Nacion Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, representing Lutheran Social Services
· Bonnie Jerome-Edmonds, 580 Hilltop Drive, Chula Vista, CA, representing Lutheran Social
Service/Project Hand
· Shirley A. Ferrill, 2712 E. 14th Street, National City, CA
· Tom Saxton, 1193 Third Avenue, Chula Vista, CA
Minutes
July 13, 1993
Page 16
· John Iciak, 1193 Third Avenue, Chula Vista, CA
· Alana Wong, 2360-C Greenbriar, Chula Vista, CA
· Martha Prudhome, 129 Eider Avenue, Chula Vista, CA
· Rocio Quiroz, 315 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA
· Linnie Archangel, 4167 Debbyann Place, San Diego, CA
· Theresa Siega, 315 Fourth Avenue #E, Chula Vista, CA
· Raul Garcia, 315 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA
· Roth B. Whalen, 2615 Congress Street, San Diego, CA
· Nancie Weiss, 2615 Congress Street, San Diego, CA
· Jerry Needle, no address given.
· Fay Needle, no address given.
· Rhonda Taylor, no address given.
· Rick Newmyer, 350 Third Avenue, Chula Vista, CA
· Gene Mercino, 1470 Seacoast Drive #B, Imperial Beach, CA, representing ECS South Bay Head Start
· Irene Vosekalns, 3939 Eagle, San Diego, CA
· Mimi Duncan, 1021 Coronado Avenue, Coronado, CA
· Raul Martinez, 3656 Louisiana Street, San Diego, CA
· David Sheldon, 13712 Jamul Drive, Jamul, CA
· Judith Johnson, 3656 Louisiana Street, San Diego, CA, representing Thursday's Meal
· Steve Wood, 6783 Alvarado Road, San Diego, CA
· Jeff Newman, 852 Chalcedony #4, San Diego, CA
· Lena Wallace, 5758 Shaw Street, San Diego, CA
There being no further public testimony, the public hearing was declared dosed.
Councilmember Moore stated he had previously voted against the project but not for the reasons stated
during the public hearing. He worked very closely with the homeless through the program with his church.
He felt the program would probably be successful due to the people involved and it was with mixed
emotions that he would be voting against the project.
Councilmember Fox stated Council had heard the same fears expressed with other programs and many of
the supporters of the proposed program were those that had previously been in opposition. The secret was
not the location but who was running the program. He had been presented with facts that the project
would not affect the property values and had not been presented with evidence to the contrary. The issue
of f'mancing and the appraisal would be dealt with next week. He was satisfied that the easement questions
had been solved. He asked staff to include a copy of the appraisal and recertification in the packet for
subsequent meetings regarding the item. Crime was an issue that was raised but an expert from the Crime
Prevention Unit had recommended that the security be enhanced but also stated there would not be a
noticeable increase in the area. The project would be run with stricter rules than the norm in that
neighborhood. If there were drugs or alcohol at the facility the people would be evicted. Because of
National City's participation in the project, proximity to National City was important. He felt the issue that
still needed to be resolved was the review process. He would support the CUP and understood the fears and
concerns of the neighborhood but asked for the neighborhood's understanding in his decision. He was
confident that Southbay Community Services would address the fears of the neighborhood.
Councilmember Horton stated she supported the project in concept. She was comfortable in saying that the
project would be maintained and managed in a way that the residents would not have to worry about who
their neighbors were. The location was ideal as it had the proper amenities to make the proposal successful.
Property values had not been decreased in areas with well supervised projects. The proposal was creative
as it offered not just shelter for the families but an opportunity to get back on their feet. She had confidence
in Southbay Community Services. There was an appraisal and as far as she could tell it was properly done.
She was concerned regarding the information presented on the condition of the roof. Although she was
going to vote for the CUP she wanted Southbay Community Services to know that she had a hard time in
Minutes
July 13, 1993
Page 17
supporting the price at $720,000. She recommended that the price be renegotiated at $675,000 given the
fact that the condition of the property was in dire need of repair, i.e. the roof and drainage.
Mayor Nader felt everyone on both sides of the issue had valid concerns and should be commended for
coming forth with those concerns. There was a small number in opposition to the project and some of those
signing the petitions had contacted the Council requesting that their names be removed due to
misinformation regarding the project. Southbay Community Services had a long history in the community
and he saw a pattern that he had seen in other cases. Those that were in opposition to previous projects
ended up being some of the strongest supporters of the projects. He had confidence in Southbay Community
Services because they had a record with various projects in the City. A CUP would not have been needed
if services were not being provided and terms of residence set. There was a serious need for such a project
due to the hundreds of people on the streets. He felt there needed to be a somewhat tighter condition, such
as the condition recommended by the Resource Conservation Committee, and felt Southbay Community
Services could live with the condition as they had done it before.
MS CNader, tFox) add a cond/tion to Resolution 17165, requiring that when the annual review occurred a
report be provided to the Council and that an opportunity, with notification, be provided to the public
residing in the neighborhood to comment to the Council, the CUP would be up for renewal at that time.
Councilmember Moore stated Mayor Nader had originally stated a "public hearing" and now was stating 'a
hearing the public would be invited to".
Mayor Nader stated that was correct and the public would have the right to speak if they chose.
Mr. Griffin stated the review for Casa Nuestra stated the first annual review was done by Council and after
that it went to the Zoning Administrator.
Mayor Nader requested that the same condition as applied to Casa Nuestra be applied with the
understanding that at the time of the fwst annual review, Council would have the option to extend a more
stringent aspect of that condition to future years depending upon information presented at the time of the
hearing.
Councilmember Moore referred to Condition #8, th/rd line, and felt the period could be deleted with the
addition of 'with written report to the City Council as a scheduled agend/zed item'.
Mayor Nader stated that would be acceptable with the addition of public notice.
AMENDMENT AGRERABI E TO MAKER AND SECOND OF MOTION: vote on motion, as amended, approved
4-0-0-1 with Rindone abstaining.
RESOLLrllON 17165, AS AMFANDED OI, F~P, ED BY MAYOR NADER, reading of text was waived, passed and
approved 3-1-0-1 with Moore opposed and Rindone abstaining.
City Attorney Boogaard requested clarification regarding the first annual review, i.e. after rehabilitation and
occupancy.
Mayor Nader stated that was correct.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None
Minutes
July 13, 1993
Page 18
)
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
22. Request by the Housing Advisory Committee that Counc~ negotiate for at least 200 existing rental
assistance certificates beLng administered by the San Diego Cotmty Housing Authority - Joe Casillas,
Chairman, Housing Advisory Committee.
Continued to the 7/20/93 meeting.
ACTION ITEMS
23.A. REPORT UPDATE ON SOLID WASTE PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT AND
ALTERNATIVE DISPOSAL OPTIONS - At the first meeting of the newly formed Solid Waste Interim
Commission, the Commission voted unanimously to recommend to their respective Councils and the Board
of Supervisors that the deadline for approving the Solid Waste Participation Agreement be extended (by
amendmen0 to 7/23/93. The report provides updated information regarding regional solid waste activities
and alternative disposal options, and presents the Interim Agreement and the amendment for Councfi's
reconsideration. Staff recommends Council accept the report and approve the resolution. (City Manager)
B. RESOLUTION 17166 APPROVING AGRRRMENT (AS AMENDED) BY, BETW~.~.N AND AMONG
THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO AND THE CITIES OF THE COUNTY ESTABLISHING AN INTERIM SOLID
WASq~ COMIVIISSION AND PROVIDING FOR THE DISPOSAL OF SOLID WASTE, AND COMIVIfI'flNG FIFTY
PERCENT OF THE CITY'S WAstESTREAM TO THE COUNTY
Continued to the 7/20/93 meeting.
ITEMS pUIJ.RI~ FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
Items pulled: 5c, 6, and 14. The minutes will reflect the published agenda order.
OTHER BUSINESS
24. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT(S) - None
25. MAYOR'S REPORT(S)
a. Ratification of appointments: Louis Alvarez - International Friendship Commission; and Sheila
Washington - Economic Development Commission Ex-Officio. Continued to the 7/20/93 meeting.
b. Reconsideration of 1993/94 budget. Continued to the 7/20/93 meeting.
c. Cox Cable adult channel. Con~nued to the 7/20/93 meeting.
26. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilman Fox
· Review of Police Department policy regarding minor narcotic law violations on school campuses.
Continued from the meeling of 6/22/93. Continued to the 7/20/93 meeting.
Minutes
July 13, 1993
Page 19
Councilman Moore
· Reconsideration of Solid Waste Management Agreement and eligibility to serve on Interim
Commission by listing areas of concern as understandings versus conditions and that the various City's items
of understanding to be among the first order of business of the Commission. Continued to the 7/20/93
meeting.
· Letters to Mayors of Imperial Beach, National City, and City of San Diego regarding Eighth District
area and County Board of Supervisors regarding First District south of SR-S4 urging them to join Chula Vista
in a unified effort regarding a basic divergence program and a follow-up meeting with Presiding 2uvenile
Judge Pate, Probation Department, and District Attorney's Office. Goal was to agree upon a minimum
offer/court fine of thirty days of community service with parent presence for fifty per cent of the service
when youths are apprehended in acts of graffiti application. Continued to the 7/20/93 meeting.
Councilman Rindone
· Evaluation criteria for City Manager and format. Continued to the 7/20/93 meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
The City Council recessed at 11:4S p.m. and reconvened at 12:05 a.m. in closed session to discuss:
Instructions to negotiators pursuant to Government Code Section S49S7.6 - Chula Vista Employees
Association (CVEA), Western Council of Engineers (WCE), Police Officers Association (POA),
International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), Executive Management, Mid-Management, and
Unrepresented. Continued from the meeting of 6/22/93.
Pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section S49S6.9 - EPA vs. the City of San Diego,
Chula Vista amicus party discussion, instructions to attorneys. Conlinued from the meeting of
6/22/93.
Pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - Igou vs. the City of Chula Vista.
(For update report, if any.) Continued from the meeting of 6/22/93.
Pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section S49S6.9 - City of Chula Vista vs. Aptec No.
2.
Potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section S49S6.9 - City of Chula Vista vs. County
of San Diego regarding tipping fee surcharge.
Pending litigation pursuant ro Government Code Section 549S6.9 - Institution of litigation against
County of San Diego regarding Daley Rock Quarry CUP.
Potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section S49S6.9 - City of Chula Vista vs. County
of San Diego regarding booking fees.
Pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section S49S6.9 - Jones Intercable.
Appointment of Department Head pursuant to Government Code Section S49S7.
Evaluation of City Manager pursuant to Government Code Section S49S7.
Minutes
July 13, 1993
Page 20
ADJOURNMENT AT 1:10 A.M. to the Regular City Council Meeting on July 20, 1993 at 6:00 p.m. in the City
Council Chambers.
A Special Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency convened at 11:45 p.m. and adjourned at 12:05 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CMC, City Clerk
by: Vicki C. Soderquist, Deputy ~fty~erk ,. ~,~