Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1993/11/23 MINUTE~ OF A REGDLAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA Tuesday, November 23, 1993 Council Chambers 6:08 p.m. Public Services Building CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Councilmembers Fox, Hotton, Moore, Rindone, and Mayor Nader (left the meeting at 8:16 p.m.) ALSO PRESENT: John D. Goss, City Manager; Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney; and Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk 2. PI.F.r}GE OF AIJ.RGIANCE TO THE FLAG. SILENT PRAYER 3. APPROVAL OFMINUTES: October 28, 1993 (Joint Council/County Board of Supervisors), November 2, 1993 (Regular City Council), and November 9, 1993 (Regular City Council) MSUC (Fox/Rindone) to approve the minutes of October 28, 1993, November 2, 1993, and November 9, 1993 as presented. 4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY: a. Oath of Office: Economic Development Commission Ex-Officio - Carolyn McGraw; Human Relations Commission - Ronald Morton; International Friendship Commission - Mildred N. Knodt and Gerald W. McDonald. Oath of Office was administered to Carolyn McGraw and Gerald W. McDonald by City Clerk Authelet. b. Retiring Board and Commission Member Resolutions: Human Relations Commission - Elizabeth Allen Safety Commission - Ollie Braden International Friendship Commission - Lee Ann Decker Commission on Aging - Linda Gilstrap Senior & Disabled Transportation - Nancy Hitchock, Joan Nicholson, Anne Fabrick, and Mabel Rabe Board of Ethics - Leo Kelly Montgomery Planning Area Committee - Ann Jennette McFarlin Town Centre Project Area Committee - Charles Peter, Gary Hatper, Will Hyde, and Dale Ob. lau Parks & Recreation Commission - Cliff Roland and Bob Lind Civil Service Commission - Delbert Boemer and Oscar Vogel Planning Commission - Joanne Carson Board of Appeals - John Nash c. Mayor Nader stated he and Kay Dennison, Chair of the Commission on Aging, attended an award ceremony with Governor Wilson where the City of Chula Vista was the only city to receive two awards of Excellence for Innovative Programs. The City received one award for the joint planning with the County of San Diego for the Otay Ranch project and one award for Chula Vista Project Care. Ms. Dennison gave a brief outline of the program. Minutes November 23, 1993 Page 2 CONSENT CAt.t~NDAR (Items pulled: Sa, Sc, and 10) BALANCE OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR OFF~D BY COUNCILMEMBER RINDONE, reading of the text wa~ waived, passed and appmved unanimously. 5. '%¥P,l'l'fF_~iq COMMUNICATIONS: a. Letter requesting meeting with Lucky Supermarket representative to mediate concerns regarding the rezoning of the parcel at the comer of Third and 'J' Street - Kenneth Ham, 724 Garrett Ave., Chula Vista, CA 91910. It is recommended that staff meet with residents along with a Lucky representative during the week of November 29th. Staff has been in contact with Lucky representatives, who agree on this approach. Staff would return with a report to Council regarding the outcome of this meeting at the Council meeting of December 7th. Pulled from the Consent Calendar. · Barbara Henderson, 715 Garrert Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, stated she lived behind the proposed Lucky store and requested that Council reconsider the rezoning. The residents were unhappy with trucks coming off "J" Street behind their houses. She was concerned as to who would monitor the conditions placed on the project over the years. They had artended all the meetings except the last one which she could not attend. Robert Leiter, Director of Planning, stated the meeting with the neighbors was scheduled for Wednesday, December 1st at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall. Representatives from Lucky Stores, as well as staff, would be in attendance. All residents of Garrert Avenue, south of "J" Street, would be sent notices of the meeting. Councilmember Moore stated Council approved the rezoning only after a number of public meetings had been held. He did not believe everyone would be 100% happy. The only item placed as a condition by Council was to have staff and Lucky go back to the neighborhood to see what height the wall should be. If there was going to be a meeting, that was the item that was open to the neighborhood, but to redo what had already been done he had concems for. The commitment had been made except for one item, the height of the wall. Mayor Pro Tem Rindone stated the question of enforcement of the time restrictions for delivery was addressed during the public hearing. Ballards would be installed and locked during those hours that deliveries were prohibited. · Denise Cricksman, 709 Garrert Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, stated she was also speaking on behalf of her father, 771 Garrett Avenue, and requested Council rescind their actions on the rezoning and General Plan amendment for the Third and "J" Street project and order an environmental impact study based on the following: 1) increased traffic on "J" Street would make it impossible to enter "J" from Garrett; 2) increase of noise pollution; 3) safety of children with the increased traffic; 4) increase of population in area which increased the possibility of crime; 5) vagrants; and 6) air pollution from the added traffic. She was unable to attend the last meeting as it was held at 4:00 p.m. · Kenneth Ham, 724 Garrett Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, presented Council with a petition signed by most of the residents on Garrett Avenue requesting Council rescind their decision on the General Plan amendment and zoning changes. They felt Council had set a precedent by not opening Gotham Avenue thereby maintaining the neighborhood's quality of life. They felt the zoning change would impact their neighborhood's quality of life. The Resource Conservation Commission failed to pass the Negative Declaration with Commissioner Meyers stating she needed further information regarding the impact and more time to review the document. Commissioner Guerreiro opposed the larger store in an already dense area and the taking of adjacent playground space. Commissioner Meyers withdrew her vote after being given incorrect information that Lucky lost their lease and would move out of the area. Mr. Gardner had stated that Lucky was a good tenant and that he wanted a grocery store in that area. They requested a new Minutes November 23, 1993 Page 3 hearing and vote by Council based on that new information. The increase in traffic, safety, and air quality issues warranted an environmental impact report. He had been noticed of the meetings, but had been unable to attend the last meeting. · Mae Neumann, 735 Garrett Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, stated she had appeared at the Planning Commission meeting in opposition to the project. She felt there were other vacant lots, zoned for business, where a store could be built. She felt the property should remain R-1 and that time was needed for negotiations. Their fLrst concern was the placement of the store next to the only houses on the property and Lucky refused to move the store. Mayor Pro Tem Rindone questioned if there was a discussion held on locating the facade of the facility facing north with the back to the Masonic Temple or Post Office. That option would keep the trucks away from the residences. Mr. Leiter stated he could not respond to that specific alternative. Site alternatives were discussed at the town meetings and Planning Commission hearings. Staff was recommending that at the meeting with Lucky representatives that the neighbors concerns be heard, staff review those specific concerns, and bring back a report back to Council on 12/7. Council had the ability on 12/7 to either extend the effective date of their action or take other action. He requested that the City Attorney clarify that action. Councilmember Moore questioned why it had to be on 12/7. Mr. Leiter responded that was the date staff had planned to bring back the report to Council with the results of the meeting. It was his understanding the action taken by Council regarding the rezoning had a second reading on 11/9 and would go into effect thirty days following that date. It was also less than thirty days after the City filed the Notice of Determination regarding the Negative Declaration which was another legal consideration. Mr. Ham stated he spoke with legal counsel and had been informed that it was possible that some of the time could run out thirty days after the Council approved the motion. From their standpoint, the time ran out thirty days after that date which was prior to the 12/7 meeting. As residents, they did not want to expend between $10,000 - $20,000 to file suit to get an EIR. They were asking that Council allow enough time to resolve the situation with Lucky Stores so there could be a resolution without going to court. They wanted to sit down in good faith with Lucky without a time clock running. City Attorney Boogaard questioned if the entitlement was granted in the form of a zone change or CUP. Mr. Leiter responded it was a General Plan amendment adopted by resolution. A rezone was adopted by ordinance and the second reading of the rezone occurred on 11/9/93 with staff filing the Notice of Determination regarding the Negative Declaration on both actions on 11/10/93. City Attorney Boogaard stated the legal remedy to the rezone action could be a referendum. That was why the effective date of an ordinance was thirty days after second reading. If the thirty days ran out on 12/10 and the action was denied on 12/7 the chances of preparing a referendum was too short. In terms of amending the action taken by Council, until substantial expenditures were made in connection with the zoning entitlement, the developer did not get vested rights until they actually did some substantial piece of construction work advancing the new facility. Mr. Leiter stated the applicant still had to get approval of a precise plan by the Design Review Committee and then would have to go through the building permit process which would take several months. City Attorney Boogaard stated Council could reconsider its land use plan and zoning map. If Counc~ was so inclined, they could set the matter for reconsideration for the 12/7 meeting. The petition requested an Minutes November 23, 1993 Page 4 extension of the referendum period and that was not an extendable option as it ran by virtue of the City Charter and State law. The proper manner of correcting it would be reconsideration of the ordinance. Councilmember Fox stated the neighbor's concern was that if Council failed to reconsider they would not have enough time to file a referendum. City Attorney Boogaard stated that was correct, but there was not much else the Council could do. Reconsideration could also be done after the referendum period, but he felt the City would be in a bet'cer position if reconsideration was done before the end of the referendum period. MS (Fox/Rindone) to schedule reconsideration of the General Plan amendment and rezone ordinance on 12/7/93. Mayor Pro Tern Rindone questioned if a time certain, 6:00 p.m.., was acceptable to the Maker of the Motion. Agreed to by the Maker of the Motion. VOTE ON MOTION: approved 3-1-1 with Moore opposed, Nader absent. Councilmember Moore stated one of the items the residents questioned, which was paramount to him, was whether a full EIR was needed due to traffic. He requested a memo to Council regarding that issue. Mayor Pro Tem Rindone felt there were two key issues: 1) impact of traffic; and 2) if there was a review of a design with the back of the market facing towards the post office. If that had not taken place, Council needed to know. * * * Mayor Nader returned to the meeting at 7:56 p.m. * * * b. Letterrequestingad~nati~n~f$5~f~rh~idaygiftsfurabusedchi~dren-Sc~ttShaffer~MF~C~DSU Coordinator, South Bay Chapter, Family Stress Center, 571 Third Ave., Chula Vista, CA 91910. It is recommended that this request be forwarded to the Human Services Council for their referral to the appropriate agency. Mayor Nader requested that the F~rnfly Stress Center be invited to make a prer~entation to Council under Special Orders of the Day sometime before Chrisunas so the public could learn about the program and how they could make donations. There being no objections, the request was incorporated into the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Moore stated he had received a call from an individual hoping that the City was not donating $500 because it had been Council policy not to do so in the past, but they would do so themselves. He would inform the Chair of the Human Services Council of who that person was. c. Letter requesting that the seats of Julia Wubenhorst and Allyson Borden on the Youth Commission be declared vacanL It is recommended that the seats be declared vacant and the City Clerk be directed to post immediately according to the Maddy Act in the Clerk's Office and the Public Library. Pulled f~om the Consent Calendar. Mayor Nader stated there was an established attendance policy which stated a commissioner was required to attend at least 75% of the meetings and they had not exceeded that requirement, they had to miss one more before the policy took effect. The policy also stated the seat was automatically vacated and in order to avoid embarrassment he suggested that the policy be carried out without being publicly agendized. MSUC (Nader/Horton) to file the letter. Mayor Nader requested that the City Clerk give Councilmembers a copy of the policy. Minutes November 23, 1993 Page 5 * * * Council recessed at 7:58 p.m. and reconvened at 8:16 p.m. with Mayor Nader absent * * * 6. RESOLUTION 17310 AMENDING THE TRI.RGRAPH CANYON ESTATES SECflONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN {PC1VI-91-7) AND TENTATIVE SUBDMSION MAP (PCS-93-3) BY CLOSING GOTHAM STREET TO THROUGH TRAFFIC INCLUDING EMERGENCY AND PEDESTRIAN ACCK~S -On 11/16/93, a public hearing was held to consider the closing of Gotham Street. At that time, Council directed staff to amend the resolution to close Gotham Street to through traffic including emergency and pedestrian access. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Planning and Director of Public Works) Continued from the 11/16/93 meeting. 7. RESOLUTION 17313 APPROVING GRANT; APPROPRIATING $74,368 FROM 619-6190-PR- 189; AND REAPPROPR1ATING $8,671 FROM 600-6004-PR-168 TO 600-6004-PR-189, AND $2,439 FROM 649-6490-BG-100 TO 649-6490-PR-189, AND VARIOUS FUNDS FROM OPEN SPACE ACCOUNTS; TO IVIEr THE LOCAL MATCH FOR THE SMALL BUSINESS TREE PLANTING PROGRAM - The Parks and Recreation Department applied for a tree grant from the National Small Business Tree Planting Program in February 1993. The grant application included utilizing existing programs from the Building and Housing Department's Community Appearance Program (CAP), and the Department's Open Space and Parks Division to facilitate the implementation of the grant. The grant request for $74,368 was approved and accepted for funding by the National Small Business Tree Planting Program. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Parks and Recreation) 4/5th's vote required. 8. RESOLUTION 17314 APPROPRIATING FUNDS, ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR MIIDERBACH PARK AND PASEO DEL REY PARK PLAY AREA RENOVATION IN THE ta'lY - Sealed bids were received for Lauderbach Park and Paseo Del Rey Park play area renovation. The work includes site preparation with selective demolition, clearing, and grubbing; excavation and grading; installation of play structures, importing sand, constructing various types of curbing; four inch PCC sidewalk, cast-in-place resilient surface, miscellaneous landscape and irrigation repair, construction surveying, and other miscellaneous work shown on the plans. Staff recommends Council: (1) Appropriate $23,750 from the fund balance of Montgomery/Broadway Equities Permit Fund (MPR001) to Play Equipment - Various Locations (PR-146); and (2) Accept bids and award contract to Edward A. Zasueta Contracting Company intheamountof$101,861.05. (DirectorofParksandRecreationandDirectorofPublicWorks) 4/5th'svote required. 9. RESOLIJ'IION 17315 APPROPRIATING $186,239 FROM THE UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE OF FUND 253 CFRANSPORTATION PARTNERSHIP FUND) TO CAPITAL IMPROVEMFANT PROJECT {ACCOUNT NUMBER 253-2530-ST-153), METROPOLITAN TRANSIT DEVELOPMFAN'T BOARD CMTDB) BRIDGE WIDENING AT MAIN sIREET AND INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD AND AITIHORIZING FINAL PAYMF_ANIT OF $484,468 TO THE MTDB FOR THE CITY SHARE OF THE COST OF THE MAIN STREET UNDERPASS PROJECT On 12/14/89, the City indicated to the MTDB in a letter that Chula Vista was willing to pay 10% of the cost of the Main Street Underpass Project. Council approved the expenditure of $600,000 and further authorized the expenditure of an additional $150,000 for the construction of street improvements under the bridge. Payment of $330,000 to MTDB was approved on 3/2/93 as an initial payment for the cost of all the work. The project has now been completed, and MTDB has requested final payment for the City's share of the cost of the combined projects. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works) 4/Sth's vote required. 10. RESOLUTION17316 ACCEPTING PETITION FOR FORMATION OF A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FOR THE CONb'IRUCTION OF ~I.I.Ry PAVING FROM 'J' STREET TO I(EARNEY STREET BETWEEN ELM AVENUE AND SECOND AVENUE - A petition has been received from property Minutes November 23, 1993 Page 6 owners in the 700 block along Second and Elm Avenues requesting that special assessment proceedings be commenced for construction of paving the unimproved alley between those streets. Upon acceptance by Council, the petition will be filed in the City Clerk's office. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works) Pulled from the Consent Calendar. · Barbara Gilman, 733 2nd Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, stated the alley was currently dirt and functioned adequately. She did not feel a concrete alley was necessary. There was already a problem with cars speeding in the alley and she felt the dirt and potholes helped to keep the speeds down. Just because 60.2% of the homeowners signed a petition it did not necessarily mean it was the right and necessary thing to do. She was upset that if the petition was granted she would be charged $3,000 - $6,600 for the work. She was unemployed and did not have options available to pay for it. · David Hall, 720 Elm Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, stated he used the alley for access to his residence. He was opposed to one item only and that was a safety concern. There were non-residents that used the alley as a short cut as there was no stop sign on either end. There was no provision in the project for speed bumps or other type of speed control. He had two children and he was concerned regarding their safety due to increased speeds if the alley was paved. If the City agreed to put in speed bumps and maintain the speed bumps he would not be opposed. John Lippitt, Director of Public Works, stated it would be a concrete alley with the center for drainage. It was not physically impossible to put speed bumps in the alley. It had never been done before and was a policy issue Council may want to deal with. Staff would look into it and report back to Council at the public hearing after the design was completed. · Sean Murphy, 718 Elm Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, spoke on behalf of the owners that wanted the alley paved. One of the problems was that many of the residents on the alley did not have off-street parking and relied on the alley for access to their property. During the winter there was a problem with water and ruts and during the remainder of the year there was a problem with dust. Cars racing down the alley was a major concern and they hoped a paved alley would discourage them. Payments could be made over a number of years so cost would not be a major factor for most of the residents. He also felt the property values would go up with the improvement. Councilmember Moore stated the Council policy was originally a sidewalk improvement policy and it was now being used as an alley policy. He had a problem with the City responsibility including relocation of all public improvements, including street lights, traffic standards, fire hydrants, etc. which were normally on sidewalks. He would not accept drainage in an alley or street because of the potential to be a major cost. It was his understanding that for the particular item being considered, drainage was not a major cost. Mr. Lippitt stated staff did not propose to participate in the improvement cost for any of the public improvements. The only portion the City would participate in would be design and inspection. The policy was included for Council reference only. Council action would allow staff to begin design and money would be put into the CIP program for next year to front the program. Another public hearing would be held. Councilmember Moore felt information should be sent to all the residents, with a copy to the Council, regarding hardship cases and what the City was doing to help save money. Mr. Lippitt stated there would be further meetings and staff could share the information with them at that time. RESOLLrYION 17316 OI'I~'Iz~IED BY COIJNCILMEMBER MOORE, reading of the text was waived, parsed and approved 4-0-1 with Nader absent -~, * * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * * Minutes November 23, 1993 Page 7 PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES 11. PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERING ABATING THE SCHEDUI.RI~ 1994 BUSINESS LICENSE TAX INCREASE TO RETAIN BUSINESS LICENSE TAXES IN CALENDAR YEAR 1994 AT THEIR CURRENT 1991 LEVELS - On 10/2S/90, Council adopted the current Business License Tax Schedule and provided for a three year phase-in of increased business license taxes. The schedule set forth the tax rates for Calendar Years (Of) 1991-1993 and provided for a 6% tax increase in subsequent years to account for inflation. The ordinance also provided Council with an annual option to abate the scheduled tax rate down to a minimum level specified (CY 1991 rates) via Council resolution. Since the Master Tax Schedule was adopted, Council has held an abatement hearing and subsequently abated the entire tax increases scheduled for CY 1992 and CY 1993. Therefore, the current CY 1993 tax rates represent at the minimum (CY 1991} level allowed by ordinance. If Council does not pass the resolution to abate the tax in CY 1994, tax rates for the majority of businesses will more than double. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Finance) RESOLUTION 17317 ABATING THE SCHEDUI.RD CAI.RNDAR YEAR 1994 BUSINF_,SS LICENSE TAX INCREASE AS PROVIDED IN ORDINANCE 2408, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF TAXES ON SPECIFIC BUSINESSES WHICH WERE ADOPTED BY COUNCIL ORDINANCE A~'I'~ JANUARY 1, 1991 This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open. · Carolyn Butler, 97 Bishop Street, Chula Vista, CA, owner of the Butler Companion Agency, spoke against any increase in the business license tax. She also spoke on behalf of LaBella Pizza in opposition of the tax. She had been informed that LaBella Pizza had paid $280,000 to have the parking lot behind their building renovated and nothing had been done by the City and she questioned when it would be done. Mayor Nader stated staff would be contacting the owner of LaBella Pizza. There being no further public testimony, the public hearing was declared closed. RESOLUTION 17317 OFFERED BY HORTON, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved unanimously. ORAL COIVI1VIUNICATIONS · Tom Robinson, 6401 Linda Vista Road, San Diego, CA, representing San Diego County Board of Education, informed Council there was a matter that had gone unresolved between the two agencies over the last three years over the Southwest Redevelopment project. Three years ago they entered into an MOU between the agencies, the matter was reviewed by Council 11/1/90 and on 10/7/90 they received a letter from the Community Development Director indicating that the Council had approved the MOU. It was a preliminary MOU that set the financial relationship between the two agencies. The agreement contemplated that before the adoption of the Redevelopment Man administrative language to put the agreement in place would be achieved and the final agreement, containing the financial and administrative provisions, would be signed. As of the current date there was still no agreement. They were seeking a commitment to gain resolution. They tried to accommodate the requests by staff and wanted to come to closure. There goal was to come back to Council by the 12/7/93 meeting with final language. Councilmember Moore stated he was surprised the agreement had not been finalized. He questioned why there had been a delay. City Attorney Boogaard stated the delay was equally attributable to both parties. The original MOU was vague and ambiguous and contained risks that were unacceptable to his office. He was insistent that there be language that would protect the City against having to pay more than fair share. Mr. Robinson had Minutes November 23, 1993 Page 8 committed, during a phone call, that it was a fair plan. His office had every expectation they could conclude the negotiations before year end. Councilmember Moore felt the item should be placed on the agenda in one or two weeks for direction to staff. Mayor Nader questioned how it had gone on for three years and the first the Council heard of it was during a public Council meeting. He would have called one of his counterparts on the other board to see what was happening. Mr. Robinson responded that they had tried to work through the administrative process and he had worked with the City Attorney. He did not want to imply that they were being barricaded in their efforts to get resolution, but they had hit the point where they had tried everything they could and it was time to notify Council that they had not reached resolution. · Carolyn Butler, 97 Bishop Street, Chula Vista, CA, stated she had been contacted by several vendors interested in establishing food service at the City complex and trolley stations. It was her understanding the City had an ordinance which prohibited vendors from selling at the "E" Street, "H" Street, and Palomar trolley stations as per MTDB. MSUC (Nader/Fox) to refer Mn. Bufler's concern regarding the ability of lunch carts to do business at the lrolley stations, i.e. the City ordinance, to staff. Councilmember Moore felt it should be a memo report to Council from staff. BOARD AND COMIVIISSION RECOMMENDATIONS None submitted. ALl'ION ITE1ViS 12. REPORT UPDATE ON SOLID WA:sI-Pj. DISPOSAL ISSUES - An oral report will be given by staff. George Krempl, Deputy City Manager, stated the North County JPA met on Friday to preview the requests to their RFP for solid waste disposal. They had identified two finalists, ECAC and Coast Waste which was the rail haul option to Utah, and Waste Management Collection and Recycling who had the franchise for E1 Cajon and a patent on technology for collection and disposal of waste without the necessity of a transfer station. The recommendations being made by the North County 3PA were: 1) they wanted to make a full presentation of their results to the Interim Solid Waste Commission on 12/16/93; and 2) depending upon action by the Interim Commission, direct their staff to proceed with negotiations with the top ranked firm for short term, up to five years, waste disposal. At the Interim Solid Waste Commission they took action on cutting $3.3 million from the County Solid Waste Enterprise program as part of the ongoing budget scrutiny. The host and mitigation fee issue was continued to the meeting of 12/16/93 where it would be docketed as the first item on the agenda. The NCRRA facility was discussed with a report being given by the Subcommittee. Action was taken by the Committee to transfer ownership of the plant to another operator to take advantage of certain tax credits. The new entity was Mellon Bank and Ducane Light Company. The Council representative abstained on that item due to unanswered questions regarding the transfer. By unanimous vote of the Interim Commission, they supported not levying the additional surcharge and not mandating any penalty for no further commitment beyond the first 50%. A motion had passed that stated if Oceanside and Escondido were willing to join the Commission there would be period of time they would Minutes November 23, 1993 Page 9 be allowed to reconsider joining without penalty. He felt the County Board would be considering that action on 12/14/93. Councilmember Fox stated the City had a seat available on the NCRRA Study Subcommittee and he felt it important to have that seat filled. He volunteered to take that position as long as he was provided the meeting times and place in advance. He had been at the meeting during the discussion of the transfer of the NCRRA facility and felt there were a number of questions that were not satisfactorily answered. There was also a three hundred page service agreement that all the cities had not had the opportunity to review, therefore, he had abstained on the vote. MSUC tRindone/Horton) to appoint Councilmember Fox as the City dalegate to the NCRRA Study Subeommltree of the Interim Solid Waste Commission and Councilmember Rindone as the alternate. Councilmember Rindone stated the controversial portion of the meeting was whether to allow the non- member cities to participate as full voting members with equal status with the participating member cities as long as they committed 50% of their solid waste. If the requirement was to be removed for non-member cities to participate the City of Chula Vista would support that and request that the Interim Solid Waste Commission be a voluntary commission which was what the City had advocated from the beginning. There was a compromise which gave them an additional thirty days to reconsider. Mayor Nader stated the County had originally been informed that the City would be represented on the NCRA Subcommittee and that he would attempt to go to the first meeting. He had then informed the County he would be unable to attend the initial meeting, but would attempt to have a Councilmember attend on behalf of the City. Their initial response was that the City could not have another Councilmember attend. The individual involved then conferred with Supervisor Slater and stated another Councilmember could attend, but they never got back to the City with the meeting schedule. The next the City heard was when the report was delivered to the Council office, one and a half days before the meeting. He hoped the County would show more cooperation and diligence in keeping the Council advised of the meeting schedule so the designated members would be able to attend. Reports should also be distributed in sufficient time to allow for proper review. Councilmember Moore felt there had been direction to staff to seek mitigation fees for the Otay Valley Road traffic signalization which had been on the agenda well before the issue of committing 50% of the trash. It was an important and costly interchange improvement and that trash trucks were lined up at Otay Valley Road and Main Street. SANDAG has recognized that mitigation had it place and had approved it. He did not feel the City should have to wait until a host fee was established to obtain the mitigation fee for that signalization. Mr. Krempl stated Councilmember Moore was correct and staff had ongoing discussions with the County. The actions of the Interim Solid Waste Commission was to defer, for the current fiscal year, any payment of mitigation fees and facility fees to any jurisdiction with the exception of San Marcos. That action was ratified by the Board of Supervisors so the City still had that hurdle. City Manager Goss stated that to pay for the full host fees and mitigation fees estimated in the current budget it would be about $5 million county-wide. He argued that in terms of mitigation fees, by the time they made an application, it was processed, and the money was spent, it would be the next fiscal year. The Committee had worked through and found $3.3 million to cut which could more than cover one-half year of the host fees and mitigation fees. They had voted to spend the money on the flare system even though it was not on the agenda and the County staff admitted they had not received any response from the Air Pollution Control District to a letter as to the need to continue the flare system. He felt it was railroaded. City Attorney Boogaard stated there was an aspect of the pending litigation that the matter would draw upon and he needed to review it in Closed Session. Minutes November 23, 1993 Page 10 Councilmember Moore stated it was direction from Council and if staff had a problem responding they should advise the Council. 18. RESOLUTION 17320 ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF T~I-~GRAPH CANYON CHANNEL, IgI'F_d~M SLOPE PROTECTION IN THE CHY - On 11/10/93, sealed bids were received for the construction of "Telegraph Canyon Channel, Interim Slope Protection". The bid from Interwest Pacific, Ltd. for $53,200.00 was the only bid received for the project. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works) (This item was added to the agenda after it was completed and is therefore out of numerical sequence.) Councilmember Horton questioned why the City was not doing something permanent rather than spending $53,000 on an interim project. John Lippitt, Director of Public Works, responded that it was to protect the banks from erosion. Staff felt it was fai~y permanent, i.e. four to ten years with minor repairs in between. The construction of a channel of adequate size would probably cost several million dollars. Council had authorized staff to begin design on the channel. Councilmember Fox questioned if there was a staff estimate on the costs of the project. Mr. Lippitt responded that the bid was below the budgeted amount of $70,000. * * * Mayor Nader left the meeting at 7:05 p.m. * * * Councilmember Fox questioned if 179 and 189 Sierra Way were notified of the project and that they would not be participating. He questioned if Council was being asked to waive any procedures. Mr. Lippitt responded they were sent a copy of the staff report. Council had already authorized the shorter response time for the bid. A preconstruction meeting was set for Wednesday and ir was hoped construction could be started by next week and completed by the beginning of the year. Councilmember Moore questioned if staff had done anything to expedite the Stream Bed Alteration permit. He recommended something be done to shake them up as the rainey season was here. Mr. Lippitt stated he saw the draft permit from the Agency last week but the final permit had not been received. Staff was diligently working on it. RESOLUTION 17320 OFFERED BY COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved 4-0-1 with Nader absent. 19. RESOLUTION 17319 AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF BONDS IN THE AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF NOT TO EXCRRD $18,000,000 TO REFINANCE THE OU lb-I ANDING OBHGATIONS OF THE t~I-i-Y TO THE CAliFORNIA pUBlIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYStPAVI - Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Administration) (This item was added to the agenda after it was completed and is therefore out of numerical sequence.) MSC (Fox/Horton) to continue the item to the meeting of 12/14/93 as recommended by staff. Approved 40-1 with Nader absent. ITEMS pUIJ.F,D FROM THE CONSENT CAt.RNDAR "~ / Items pulled: Sa, 5c, and 10. The minutes will reflect the published agenda order. Minutes November 23, 1993 Page 11 OTHER BUSINESS 13. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT(S) · Scheduling of meetings. City Manager Goss reminded Council there would not be a meeting on 11/30/93, but the Board and Commission Banquet was next week. Mayor Pro Tem Rindone stated there was a special meeting on 11/29/93 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Conference Room. City Manager Goss stated a CEQA workshop had been scheduled with the Resource Conservation Commission, the Planning Commission, and City Council on December 4th at 8:30 a.m. Councilmember Hotton stated she would not be able to attend the meeting. Councilmember Fox stated he would not be able to attend. Mr. Leiter stated several of the Planning Commissioners were also not able to attend the meeting. If there was a bear quorum staff could try to schedule the meeting in January or February. 14. MAYOR'S REPORT(S) a. Ratification of appointment: Child Care Commission - Angle Gish Charter Review Committee - Janet Lawry and Wadie Deddeh MSC (Fox/Moore) to ratify the appointments of Angle Gish to the Child Care Commission end Janet LarRy and Wadie Deddeh to the Charter Review Committee. Approved 4-0-1 with Nader absent. b. RESOLUTION 17318 APPROVING AN INTERIM AGRRRMFANT REGARDING WrrI-DRAWAL PROM THE SAN DIEGO AREA WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DISlRICT, AND AUTHORIZING MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAME RESOLUTION 17318 OFFERED BY MAYOR PRO TEM RINDONE, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved 4-0~1 with Nader absent. 15. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Fox: · Status of Chula Vista participation in the NCRRA Study Subcommittee. Councilmember Fox stated the item was handled under a previous action item and he did not have further comments. Councilmember Moore: · Councilmember Moore stated Council had previously approved the concept of the divers/on program as it pertained to graffiti. If a savings was created within the graffiti program it would be reapportioned for improvement of youth activities. He had asked the Judge to set up a meeting with those cities that had a diversion program along with the Probation Department and the District Attorney's Office to negotiate a program. He felt it was time for the City to invite taggets to a meeting with appropriate speakers, those they recognized and respected, and ask them to stop the graffiti and get recommendations as to what could be done with the savings. Minutes November 23, 1993 Page 12 Councilmember Rindone: · Counc~member Rindone stated he had been contacted by a constituent regarding Bonita Road, east of Pier I Imports, on the lanes heading west, there was a double striping of lanes and as they came closer to the area they went right into the concrete divider. During the daytime cars were able to easily maneuver through the area, but a night it was not visible. He wanted to refer it to staff for a report back regarding the installation of reflectors or other corTective action. Councilmember Moore stated he was aware of the situation and it was in the County. Supervisor Bilbray's office was aware of the situation, but the Gounty public works department should also be notified. City Attorney Boogaard requested that pending litigation involving Aptek be included in Closed Session. The item arose after the preparation of the agenda. MSC 0Vloore/Horton) that information regarding the Aptek litigation was received after the preparation of the agenda and to find that an urgency existed to allow Council to consider the item in Closed Session. Approved 4-0-1 with Nader absenL ADJOURNMENT The City Council recessed at 8:50 p.m. and reconvened at 9:20 p.m. in a closed session to discuss: Instructions to negotiators pursuant to Government Code Section S4957.6 - 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 11/16/93. Pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - City of Chula Vista vs. San Diego Palm Plaza Project. Pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - EPA vs. the City of San Diego, Chula Vista amicus party discussion, instructions to attorney. Potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - City of Chula Vista vs. County of San Diego regarding tipping fee surcharge. ADJOURNMENT AT 10:25 P.M. to a Special Meeting on Monday, November 29, 1993 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Conference Room, thence to a Special Meeting on Monday, December 6, 1993 at 4:00 p.m. in the Counc~ Conference Room, thence to the Regular City Council Meeting on December 7, 1993 at 4:00 p.m. in the City Counc~ Chambers, and thence to a Special Meeting on Wednesday, December 8, 1993 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Conference Room. A Special Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency convened at 7:58 p.m., recessed at 8:16 p.m., reconvened at 8:50 p.m., and adjourned at 9:18 p.m. Respectfully submitted, BEVEKLY A. AUTHELET, CMC, City Clerk Vicki C. Soderquist, DeputSr~,Clerk