Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1995/11/21 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA Tuesday, November 21, 1995 Council Chambers 6:08 p.m. Public Services Building CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Councilmembers Alevy, Moot, Padilia, Rindone, and Mayor Horton ALSO PRESENT: John D. Goss, City Manager; Bmce M. Boogaard, City Attorney; and Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. SILENT PRAYER 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: November 7, 1995 (Regular City Council Meeting), November 13, 1995 (Special Meeting of the City Council), and November 14, 1995 (Regular City Council Meeting). MSUC (Horton/Alevy) to approve the minutes of a November 7, 1995 (Regular City Council Meeting), November 13, 1995 (Special Meeting of the City Council), and November 14, 1995 (Regular City Council Meeting) as presented. 4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY: a. Proclamation commending Kingsley McLaren. The proclamation was presented by Mayor Pro Tem Rindone. b. Presentation to Council by the Chula Vista Aquatics Association. Anne Taylor and Sarah Reimund presenW, Al a plaque to the Council on behalf of the Chula Vista Aquatics Association. CONSENT CALENDAR (Items pulled: none) BALANCE OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR OFFERED BY COUNCILMEMBER RINDONE, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved unanimously with Rindone abstaining on Item 13. 5. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: a. Letter from the City Attorney stating that there were no reportable actions taken in Closed Session on 11/14/95. It is recommended that the letter be received and filed. b. Letter from Ricki Pedersen requesting financial assistance for the JAZZ TRAX stage band to travel in March 1996 to Orlando, Florida to compete in a regional jazz festival and perform at Disney World. It is recommended that $500 of the Council Contingency Account be granted to JAZZ TRAX in exchange for which the group will perform at two City events within the next year. c. Letter from Pamela Campos and Teresa Bristow requesting two turn lanes be added on Orange Avenue, one at Jade Avenue and one at Jasper Avenue. It is recommended that the letter be forwarded to staff and the Safety Commission for review and response. 6. ORDINANCE 2652 AMENDING SECTION 5.07.020 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ENABLE THE CITY COUNCIL TO ABATE THE BUSlNESS LICENSE TAX RATES IN ONE-YEAR INCREMENTS FOR UP TO THREE CALENDAR YEARS, AND AMENDING SECTION 5.02 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO MAKE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES TO MAKE THE MUNICIPAL CODE CONSISTENT WITH EXISTING PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING BUSINESS LICENSE APPLICATIONS (second readin~ and Minutes November 21, 1995 Page 2 ad0ntion) - The Business License Tax ordinance adopted in 1990 was structured so that taxes increase annually unless they are abated by Council. Last year Council requested that the ordinance be changed to eliminate the annual abatement hearings. Staff felt the City's interests would be better preserved by allowing the tax to be abated for up to three years rather than the one that is currently allowed. Staff recommends Council place the ordinance on second reading and adoption. (Director of Finance) 7. RESOLUTION 18117 AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURES ON SATURDAY, DECEMBER 9, 1995 FOR THE DOWNTOWN BUSINESS ASSOCIATION TO CONDUCT THE ANNUAL STARLIGHT YULE PARADE, AND WAIVING OF FEES FOR CITY-PROVIDED SERVICES AND SUPPLIES The Downtown Business Association is requesting permission to conduct the annual Starlight Yule Parade along Third Avenue on Saturday, 12/9/95, and is requesting various City-provided services and supplies. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Chief of Police) 8. RESOLUTION 18118 APPROVING AGREEMENT WlTH STOORZA, ZIEGAUS, AND METZGER TO PROVIDE COMMUNITY OUTREACH SERVICES IN CONJUNCTION WITH SMARTCOMMUNITY PROJECT AND TRANSFERRING FUNDS WITHIN THE MANAGEMENT & INFORMATION SERVICES DEPARTMENT - On 10/24/95, Council approved the SmartCommunity contract with San Diego State University which provides the City with $66,960 to conduct a community outreach program. That contract allows the City to hire a consultant to assist with the project. Staff has issued a Request for Proposals, received and evaluated responses, chose a consultant and negotiated a contract with the highest rated finn. Staff reconunends approval of the resolution. (Director of Management & Information Services) 9. RESOLUTION 18119 APPROVING SUBMITTAL OF A USED OIL BLOCK GRANT APPLICATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $73,361 TO THE CALIFORNIA INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR FISCAL YEAR 1996/97 - The California Used Oil Enhancement Act requires the collection of four cents for every quart of lubricating oil sold, transferred and imported into California from oil manufacturers. Chula Vista consumers pay four cents per quart into the fund when they purchase oil. The Act mandates the California Integrated Waste Management Board use a portion of the funds to provide block grants to local governments for used oil programs that encourage recycling. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Conservation Coordinator) 10. RESOLUTION 18120 APPROVING THE POSTING OF SIGNS PROHIBITING ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONSUMPTION AT RIENSTRA SPORT FIELDS - Several coatplaints were received this past season from league officers of the South Bay Little League and Pony South League regarding problems created by adults over consumption of alcoholic beverages. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Parks and Recreation) 11. RESOLUTION 18121 GRANTING PERMISSION TO PACIFIC BELL MOBILE SERVICES TO SUBMIT FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IN ORDER TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM FACILITY IN HALECREST PARK - Pacific Bell Mobile Services has submitted an application (PCM-96-12) requesting permission to submit a Conditional Use Permit application in order to construct and operate a Personal Communications System facility, a wireless communications system similar to cellular, in Halecrest Park. Staff recommends approval ofthe resolution. (Director of Planning) 12. RESOLUTION 18122 ACCEPTING BlDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE OF A CAB & CHASSIS WITH MOUNTED AERIAL LIFT - The fiscal year 1995/96 equipment replacement budget provides for the purchase of one replacement aerial lift for the Traffic Signal section of Public Works. On 9/19/95, the purchasing agent accepted bids for the purchase. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works and Director of Finance) 13. RESOLUTION 18123 ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR "INSTALLATION OF STREET LIGHTING ON FOURTH AVENUE BETWEEN "E" STREET AND SR54" - On 11/1/95, bids were Minutes November 21, 1995 Page 3 received for the 'Installation of Street Lighting on Fourth Avenue between *E' Street and SR-54 (TF-149).* The project involves the installation of street lighting to replace the street lights that are being removed by the undergrounding of utility lines and the removal of wooden poles along Fourth Avenue. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works) Councilmember Rindone abstained from participation in order to avoid a conflict of interest due to the location of his residence to the project. 14.A. RESOLUTION 18124 APPROVING FINAL MAP AND OF TRACT 91-04 EAST PALOMAR ESTATES, ACCEPTING ON BEHALF OF THE PUBLIC THE PUBLIC STREETS DEDICATED ON SAID MAP, ACCEPTING THE EASEMENTS GRANTED ON SAID MAP WITHIN SAID SUBDIVISION, AND APPROVING SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE COMPLETION OF IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED BY SAID SUBDIVISION, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT - On 7/16/91, Council approved the Tentative Subdivision Map for Tract 91-04, East Palomar Estates. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Director of Public Works) B. RESOLUTION 18125 APPROVING SUPPLEMENTAL SUBDIVISION IIVIPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR TRACT 91-04 EAST PALOMAR ESTATES, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAME * * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * * PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES 15. PUBLIC HEARING PCC-90-25M; REQUEST FOR FIVE YEAR EXTENSION TO AN EXISTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN RV STORAGE YARD AT 1375 BROADWAY, WITHIN THE S-94 ZONE - BROADWAY PALOMAR RV STORAGE - The request is for a five year extension of an existing Conditional Use Permit which authorizes a recreational vehicle storage yard at 1375 Broadway. Additionally, the applicant is requesting the deletion of a condition to the original permit which requires payment of a parks in-lieu fee to the City. Staff recommends the public heafin~ be continued to 12/5/95. (Director of Planning) Continued from the meeting of 11/14/95. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open. MSUC (Alevy/lxadilla) to continue the public hearing to the meeting of 12/05/95 as recommended by staff. 16. PUBLIC HEARING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-95-48; REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY LOCATED AT 625 "H" STREET - AirTouch Cellular is requesting permission to construct and operate a cellular communications facility at 625 "H" Street composed of a 950 square foot enclosure containing a 360 square foot equipment building and a 75 foot tall monopole supporting 30 directional (panel) antennas and four digital (dish) antennas at the rear or northern boundary line of 625 "H" Street. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Planning) RESOLUTION 18126 GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, PCC-95-48, TO AIRTOUCH CELLULAR TO CONSTRUCT AN UNMANNED CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY AT 625 "H" STREET This b~mg the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open. * Jeffrey Lipinsky, 2896 North Park Way, San Diego, CA, representing North Park Mgmt. Co., stall he was the property manager of properties located at 677 and 665 "H" Street and a 352 unit apartment building in the 400 block of Oak Lawn Avenue between 'G " and "H " Streets. He expressed his concern regarding the aesthetic impacts and fear of impacts caused by radio waves upon electronic devices and health. He felt it would affect their ability to rent their units. Minutes November 21, 1995 Page 4 · Kevin McGee, 5355 Mira Sorrento Place, Suite 500, San Diego, CA, representing AirTouch Cellular, stated the facility would cover the western Chain Vista area as well as downtown San Diego and along I-5. It would also enhance the current signals, accommodate for future needs, and help to deal with interference problems with the Mexican cellular carrier. On 9/28/95 they held a public hearing with notices going to everyone in a 500 ft. radius and no one attended. They then contacted the owner of the trailer park and received their support. On 10/25/95 the Planning Commission unanimously supported their request with the conditions that they remove 6 whip antennas and add additional landscaping. Two conditions on the draft permit were the ability for co-location with future requests and a 5 year review. Mayor Horton questioned if it was the same company that had requested a facility on Gotham Street and if there would be any negative impacts to the hospital or any of their equipment. Robert Leiter, Director of Planning, responded that was correct. They were still pursuing other sites for the eastern area of the City. A preliminary environmental report had been done and it determined that there would be no impacts. Staff had provided public noticing of the item and no comments or concerns had been received from the hospital. There being no further public testimony, the public heating was declared closed. Councilmember Alevy questioned if there was any liability to the City due to possible effects of microwave technology. Mr. Bungasrd stated the CUP did not have a requirement for indenmification. He rccoramended that 5.5 on page 16-8 be amended to add a provision that stated "The applicant shall agree in a form satisfactory to the City Manager and City Attorney to indemnify and defend the City and it's officers and employees in connection with any loss the City may suffer as a result of permitting the proposed use". MSUC (Alevy/Padilla) to amend 5.5 to add the following provision: "The applicant shall agree in a form satisfactory to the City Manager and City Attorney to indemnify and defend the City and it's officers and employees in connection with any loss the City may suffer as a result of permitting the proposed use". RESOLUTION 18126, AS AMENDED, OIq~IERED BY MAYOR HORTON, reading of the text was waived. Mr. Boogaard asked the applicant if they agreed to the amendment. Mr. McGee stated they agreed to the amendment. VOTE ON MOTION: approved unanimously. 17. PUBLIC HEARlNG FORMING OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NUMBER 33, BROADWAY BUSINESS HOME VILLAGE - On 10/24/95, Council approved the Engineer's Report on the proposed Open Space District Number 33, Broadway Business Home Village and set 11/14/95 and 11/21/95 as the dates for the public hearings on the proposed formation. An additional tentative public hearing date was set for 12/12/95, but will not be held at the request of the Citrons as authorized by the City Attorney. Staff recomrnenda Council place the ordinance on second reading and adoption and approve the resolution. (Director of Public Works) A. ORDINANCE 2653 AMENDING SECTION 17.07 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE ALLOWING USE OF OPEN SPACE DISTRICTS FOR PARKING LOT MAINTENANCE (second randlag and adoption) B. RESOLUTION 18127 ORDERING THE IMPROVEMENTS AND THE FORMATION OF OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NUMBER 33, BROADWAY BUSINESS HOME VILLAGE, CONFIRMING THE DISTRICT DIAGRAM AND LEVYING THE ASSESSMENT AND COLLECTIBLE FOR FISCAL YEAR 1996/97 John Lippitt, Director of Public Works, stated it was the second hearing and staff recommended that Council place the ordinance on second reading, approve the resolution and adopt a minute action which would accept the waiver release and indemnity from the Broadway Business Homes. The purpose of the waiver release was to waive the 45 day period between public hestings in order to move the project forward. Minutes November 21, 1995 Page 5 This being the time and place as advertised, the public he~ring was declared open. There being no public testimony, the public hearing was declared closed. Councilmember Padilla questioned the reality of risks to the City if there was a majority protest. Mr. Lippitt responded that it was an asphalt parking lot with a small amount of landscaping. If the costs were higher than anticipated and a majority protest prohibited raising the cost of the assessment the City would cut back on the Sweeping, maintenance, etc. Councilmeraber Padilia questioned the rationale behind the applicant's reluctance to accept the transfer to a homeowner's association. Mr. Boogaard responded that it was a fear of common ownership under the State rules for condominiums and their obligation of having to file certain regulatory papers with the State. Councilmember Rindone questioned if the rates were set at the anticipated actual charge or if there was cushion. Mr. Lippitt responded that the assessment was higher than what the initial collectible would be. The ordinance also allowed an annual CPI increase. The assessment was based on 6 units but the collectible was based on 16 units. COUNCILMEMBER PADILLA O/~}ERED RESOLUTION 18127 AND PLACED ORDINANCE 2653 PLACED ON SECOND READING, reading of the texts was waived, passed and approved unanimously. MINUTE ACTION: (Padilla/Alevy) to accept the waiver release and indemnification from Broadway Business Homes. Approved unanimously. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS · Lynn Servatius, 1372 Don Carlos Ct., Chula Vista, CA, representing Church of Joy-Lutheran, invited Council to their groundbreaking on Sunday, 12/3/95 at 2:00 p.m. She thanked the Council for working with them in developing the Park & Ride in lieu of their TransDIF fees. BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS None submitted. ACTION ITEMS 18. ORDINANCE 2654 AMENDING THE CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS ORDINANCE TO CLARIFY THE CONTRIBUTIONS LIMITATION WHEN TWO ELECTIONS FOR DIFFERENT TERMS OF OFFICE . FOR THE SAME SEAT ARE OCCURRING SIMULTANEOUSLY, TO APPLY THE CITY'S CONTRIBUTIONS PROHIBITIONS AND LIMITATIONS TO INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURE COMMITTEES, AND OTHER CHANGES (first reading) - With the simultaneously occuning general and special elections coming in March, 1996, questions from potential candidates have arisen as to the operation of the City's campaign contributions ordinance which can and should be resolved by Council action rather than legal interpretation. Staff recornraends Council place the ordinance on first reading. (City Attorney) Mr. Bungaard stated the ordinance proposed six changes: 1) when there were simultaneous elections, i.e. short and long terms, it would be treated as a single election for purposes of campaign contributions - the change would be retroactive; 2) the $250 campaign contribution limit would apply on a per election event basis; 3) prohibit campaign contributions on a speculative basis for future elections; 4) would allow $250 per person contributions not just 11 months before an election event but also 2 months after to allow a candidate to pay off debt; 5) allow the excess funds in one campaign fund to be applicable to a subsequent run-off; and 6) prohibit organizational dollars from going into an independent expenditure committee. He requested that Council defer action on recommendation #4 until a further date. Minutes November 21, 1995 Page 6 Councilmember Alevy stated his main concern was No. 6 regarding independent expenditure committees. He did not fe~l a candidate should be held responsible for an independent expenditure that by law he was not allowed to know about. He felt there was also a constitutionality issue as the courts had ruled on it as a first amendment issue. Organizations should be welcomed into the political process because that was the way most individuals became involved in the political process. He had not heard an outcry regarding independent expenditures and did not feel it was an issue. Councilmember Padilia stated he disagreed with Councilmember Alevy. He felt it should be examined for the practical effect and the intent of limitations. There had been elections in the past 15 years where money came into a council race from Texas, Massachusetts, Louisiana, and Florida. He had no objection to the legitimacy of an organization taking interest in what was happening in the community, but he had a hard time understanding how money received from out of state ended up influencing a Chula Vista city council race. Individual contributions were limited to make sure that the contributions were balanced. He did not feel it was a constitutional issue but a common sense issue, i.e. being able to know what was going on in the community. Condition No. 6 as proposed did not make a candidate liable and the only difference was that the independent expenditure committee would fall under the campaign contribution limitation the same as a Chula Vista citizen. The Board of Ethics, Charter Review, City Attorney, and staff should be commended for the work they had done. Councilmember Moot felt Nos. 4 and 6 shared a similar problem, i.e. he did not feel the Council had given them enough consideration as to the implications. To pass an ordinance that was not constitutional or to put public officials in the position of violating the law did not make a lot of sense. He felt No. 4 needled to be thought through and that two months was too short of a time period. He was concerned regarding constitutionality of No. 6. He had been advised that one of the City's campaign contribution sections, not being discussed, was unconstitutional and that there was a Ninth Circuit decision that specifically held that it was unconstitutional, i.e. the limitation of accepting $1,000 from any group of people who worked for the same business as it infringed on their First Amendment rights. There was no limitation on an individual running for office giving themselves more than $250 so if someone was rich enough they could buy a seat on the council. That was permitted because there was a strong constitutional issue that precluded any governmental agency from so restricting political activity in such a manner. The Council needed to make sure that any amendments passed were constitutional and did not have any unintended impacts. Mr. Boogaard responded that he had studied the decisions of the Supreme Court on the issues, the primary decision on Buckley vs. Vallejo, which stated that expenditures could not be regulated. The same case did state that contributions could be regulated because they were expenditures of money to a campaign and was not the primary form of speech communicating to the ultimate voter and, therefore, regulatable. The proposed change did not state that a PAC could not spend it's own money communicating to the voters, it did say that it could not receive contributions greater than $250 or any organizational contributions if those contributions were intended to be spent on the election of a local city official. The proposal mirrored the same constraint on organizational dollars being involved in campaign activity that the City of San Diego used. He had talked with a deputy in their City Attorney's office who stated that they believed their ordinance and constraint on organizational contributions was constitutional. The policy as to whether the Council wanted to keep organizational dollars was up to the Council to choose. Councilmember Rindone stated the issue had been debated for generations in the City. The Charter Review Committee had looked at the issues and presented their recommendations to close the loop-holes. He felt the recommendations, other than Nos. 4 and 6 were acceptable and that Council should move forward on those. He agreed that the term of raising money two months after an election was not in the best interest of the candidate or the businesses owed. He supported the City Attorney's recommendation to review that recommendation in the future. Recommendation No. 6 was the most important of all because it was trying to co~t an unfair practice. As presently written the candidate could not direct how the money was spent, but the candidate could be legally aware of such activities. Independent expenditure committees had to file reports which were public information. After checking those reports he found that there had been a number of independent expenditure committees which he felt was unfair and taking the elections out of the hands of the citizens in Chula Vista. He would also not support the elimination of the entire regulatory procedure. Councilmember Padilia stated at the present time candidates could not accept contributions from PAC's or organizations and independent expenditure committees were not being regulated. The only difference between the two was that the candidate did not know or that the committee did not work at their "behest'. He felt it needed to be addressed and if it did not affect the time schedule for the upcoming election in March he would support a Minutes November 21, 1995 Page 7 continuance. Legislators, whether at the federal, state, or local level, did not put people in the position of violating the law, those people put themselves in the position of violating the law. MOTION: (Rindone) to place Ordinance 2654 on first reading, incorporating recommendations No. 1, No. 2, No. 3, and No. 5. Recommendations No. 4 and No. 6 to be brought back to Council within 30 days. Mr. Booguard stated any organizational dollars given by an independent expenditure committee between the present action, the next 30 days, and the 30 days thereafter to become effective, would not be subject to any new ordinance. It would be very difficult to make it retroactive. He did not feel there was any more thought that he could put forth regarding regulating independent expenditure committees. It was a matter of Council philosophy to either accept it or reject it. AMENDMENT TO MOTION: (Rindone) to place Ordinance 2654 on first reading, incorporating recommendations No. 1, No. 2, No. 3, and No. 5. Approved unanimously. MSUC (Rindone/Padilla) to refer back to the City Attorney and if appropriate to the Charter Review Commission recommendation No. 4 and return to Council on 1215195. MS (Rindone/Padilla) to approve recoreanendation No. 6. Mayor Horton stated she would vote against the motion as she wanted more time to review the recommendation. Councilmember Moot stated Councilmembers were referring to abuses he was not aware of and had not been given a record created by the Charter Review Committee or the Board of Ethics that addressed abuses. He did not want an independent expenditure committee out of state influencing an election, but he did not want to say to local organizations that they could not form an independent expenditure committee. He felt Council should take a realistic view and determine what it was they wanted to accomplish. His parents had contributed to his campaign and they lived in Buffalo, so the mere fact that someone lived outside of the City did not mean that it was bad. VOTE ON MOTION: motion failed 2-3 with Horton, Alevy, and Moot opposed. MS (RindonePrlorton) to refer recommendation No. 6 to the City Attorney for additional review and return to Council on 12/5/95. Councilmember Moot felt there needed to be alternatives and that input should be received from organizations within the City. He felt the Council was asking the City Attorney to perform in a vacuum. Mayor Horton agreed with Councilmember Moot's recommendation. AMENDMENT: (agreeable to the Maker of the Motion) to obtain input from the Charter Review Committee, Board of Ethics, or any other organization that may want to participate. To be brought back to Council by 1215195 or as soon thereafter as possible. VOTE ON MOTION AS AMENDED: approved unanimously. 19. RESOLUTION 18128 CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF THE HOLDING OF A GENERAL AND SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION FOR SEAT NUMBERS 3 AND 4, AND REQUESTING THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO CONSOLIDATE THE GENERAL AND SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS WITH THE STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, MARCH 26, 1996, FOR THE PURPOSE OF ELECTING TWO MEMBERS OF CITY COUNCIL AND SUBMITTING CERTAIN CHARTER AMENDMENTS TO THE PEOPLE; AND APPROPRIATING $61,500 THEREFOR - The filing period for the next Municipal Election on 3/26/96 is 12/4/95 12/29/95. Therefore, it is necessary to call the election before the filing period. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (City Clerk and City Attorney) 4/Sth's vote required. Mr. Boogzard reviewed the Charter Review Committee recommendations: 1) the anticipated vacancy rule change; 2) the duty to recognize an anticipated vacancy; 3) appointed replacee serve until any subsequent election opportunity; 4) a six month (three months at the least) election free zone which would suspend the need to call a Minutes November 21, 1995 Page 8 high/cost low/yield election; 5) mandatory duty to appoint a council electee to fill an interim vacancy; 6) the City Manager should begin to identify resources in the amount of $125,000 to cover the costs of a special run-off election in June; and 7) approved the proposed ballot labels in the resolution. The Registrar of Voters recommended that on ballot label on Section 2, which explained the elections for two different seats, add above the word *Seat No. 3" in parenthesis *term expiring December 1996' with the admonition that voters should vote for one and the same thing for Seat No. 3 long term and Seat No. 4 short and long terms. Councilmember Moot stated if plurality versus majority vote was to be discussed he would abstain from participation as it would not be appropriate for him to vote on something that would be easier for him to be elected. Councilmember Padilla responded that he intended to discuss the issue in connection with the ordinance. The Council would not be adopting any changes but submitting certain changes to the electorate to be decided. It was an unusual situation where two seats were up for election and each person running for each seat would technically be running in two separate elections simultaneously. The terms would be, one for a nine month period from March 1996 until December 1996 and the other was for four years from December 1996 until December 2000. The City would be running two simultaneous elections with one of the terms for nine months. If a majority was required for the short term in March the run-off would be in June 1996 because the Charter stated the Council would fill the vacancy at the next reasonable opportunity. Council needed to address the issue. He had heard the suggestion that the run-off for the March short term should be in November with the general election, but they would only serve two weeks before the person elected for the long term took office. It should be presented to the electorate to decide, under the circumatanees he felt it was the best thing to do. Mayor Horton stated it was her understanding that it had to be the next regularly scheduled election which would be March and November. Mr. Bungnard responded that Section 300(h) of the Charter stated that "If no candidate at a special election (March) received a majority of the votes cast there was to be a special run-off election on a date set by the Council as soon after such special election was practical between the two candidates receiving the first highest and second highest number of votes*. There were four election opporttmities per year, i.e. March, June, September, and November. Therefore, the next election opportunity was June. Mayor Horton stated that would cost the City approximately $125,000 and June was not the next regularly scheduled election. Mr. Bungnard responded that the Charter stated "The Council shall as soon after such special election as practical call a special run-off election". Councilmember Rindone stated Council deadlocked on the issue in the past but, regardless of where one was regarding the issue, allowing it to move forward to be voted upon by the public would not cost the City much because it would be done simultaneously with the March election. He felt the voters had been clear with Proposition J that they wanted to have a majority elect full-term or near full-term mayor and council seats. The proposal would deal with the short term, i.e. something less than one year, but particularly 1-6 months. The significant difference was that when Proposition J went to the voters there were no run-off elections and, therefore, it was not debated or discussed. Mayor Hot'ton stated the June date was not the next regularly scheduled election. Councilmember Rindone stated Council would have to call a special election which would be at a cost to the City and, if that was not done and the run-off was held in November the person would only serve for 2-3 weeks before the term ended. It should be put before the voters to make that decision. MS (Padilla/Rindone) to include the recommendation that the plurality vote be added to the ballot language in connection with short term elections, i.e. one year or under. Councilmember Padilia stated he was trying to allow the voters decide the issue and not the Council. His motion did not adopt the plurality rule. Mayor Hotton stat~l she would not support the plurality issue. She felt the voters had spoken by adopting Proposition J. Minutes November 21, 1995 Page 9 VOTE ON MOTION: motion failed 2-2-0-1 with Horton/Alevy opposed and Moot abstaining. RESOLUTION 18128 O/~'I~ERED BY COUNCILMEMBER PADILLA, reading of the text was waived. Mr. Boogaard stated the plurality issue was not included in the resolution, therefore, Councilmember Moot could participate in the adoption of the resolution. He requested that the clarifying comments from the Registrar of Voters be included in Section 2, i.e. put behind Seat No. 3, in parenthesis, "term expiring December 1996" and "vote for one* behind Seats 3 and 4, short and long terms. · Rod Davis, 233 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, representing the Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce, felt 8 months should be included in the ballot language so the City would not have to spend $125,000 on a special election. He recommended that any special election run-off be done by a mail ballot as it was less expensive. Council would decide what the voters would see on the ballot, therefore, limiting the decisions and options the voters had. He requestM that there be simplicity of language and straight forwardness in the ballot measures. Mr. Boogaard clarified that the Charter did not allow mail ballots for the election of council or mayor. The Charter Review Committee would be reviewing the issue but it would not be in time for the March election. Councilmember Rindone stated there was a philosophical difference of opinion on the Council. The issue of plurality versus majority was adopted prior to run-off elections. He felt it unfortunate that the electorate would not be able to respond. Mayor Horton disagreed and felt the electorate had responded in adopting Pruposition J. FRIENDLY AMENDMENT: 0torton, agreed to by the Maker of the Motion) to change the election free zone to 9 months. Mr. Boogaard clarified that the operation of that section would not apply to the upcoming election, but post 1996 elections. Councilmember Moot questioned if it meant that there would be a special run-off election in June. Mr. Boogaard responded that there would be a special run-off election. It was up to the Council to call a special run-off election as soon as practical. Councilmember Moot stated he was confused as to where in the Charter was the requirement for a special election in June. Mr. Boogaard replied that it was in Section 303(h) of the Charter. Mayor Hotton stated the Charter stated "as practical' and a special election in June would be $125,000 versus $16,000 in November with the general election. She felt a run-off in November was the most practical thing to do. Councilmember Moot stated when he read that section and applied the common meaning of "practical" and saw that there was an election in November, it did not appear practical to call an election in June. Councilmember Alevy felt the Charter gave the Council the ability to judge what was practical which was interpretative. VOTE ON RESOLUTION 18128, AS AMENDED: approved unanimously. 20. RESOLUTION 18114 AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A POWER TO SAVE INCENTIVE AGREEMENT WITH SDG&E FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PHASE lI OF A COMPREHENSIVE ENERGY RETROFIT PROGRAM; AMENDING CIP GG149 ENERGY RETROFIT PHASE II TO THE FISCAL YEAR 1995/96 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM; APPROPRIATING $87,618.32 THEREFOR - The City has implemented an ongoing retrofit program to save money and conserve energy. This is Phase II of the retrofit program which will annually save $35,000 in utility costs and will retrofit exterior and interior lighting at 22 municipal buildings and provide $25,747.30 in incentives from SDG&E. Staff · T Minutes November 21, 1995 Page 10 recommends approval of the resolution. (Environmental Resource Manager) 4/Sth's vote required. Continued from the meeting of 11114/95. Councilmember Alevy stated he would abstain from participating in order to avoid a conflict of interest due to his employment. Barbara Bamburger, Environmental Resources Manager, stated included in the Table was the retrofit of the tennis court interior/exterior lights. Due to the payback over 16 years staff did not feel it was cost effective to do. Staff recommended that Council move forward with all retrofits with the exclusion of the College tennis building. RESOLUTION 18114, AS AMENDED, OFFERED BY COUNCILMEMBER PADILLA, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved 4-0-0-I with Alevy abstaining. Councilmember Rindone questioned if the $75,693 would come from the General Fund reserves. Ms. Bamburger responded that was correct. 21. RESOLUTION 18129 APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH THE SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS FOR SERVICES RELATED TO TELECENTER DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATIONS, ACCEPTING AND APPROPRIATING $80,000 FROM THE ENERGY CONSERVATION FUND IN PASS- THROUGH FUNDS PROM THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION - In the spring of 1995, staff worked with SANDAG to apply for additional grant funding from the California Energy Commission (CEC) to offset general telecenter operations and services costs. The CEC accepted the joint application and agreed to provide an additional $80,000 for telecenter operational costs for the second year of operations. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Environmental Resource Manager) 4/5th's vote required. Barbara Barnburger, Environmental Resources Manager, stated a general outline on upcoming projects, revenue generating partnerships, and marketing efforts had been included in the report. More comprehensive information would be available after the first of the year. The grant would be a lump sum provided to the City up front. Councilmember Rindone requested a report in July 1996 as to whether the occupancy rates had been achieved. RESOLUTION 18129 OFFERED BY C OUNCIEMEMBER RINDONE, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved unanitnously. 22. RESOLUTION 18130 AMENDING THE CITY'S MASTER FEE SCHEDULE TO ESTABLISH NEW GREEN FEES AT CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE - American Golf Corporation, the golf course lessee, is requesting a green fee adjustment as per the lease agreement approved by Council in November 1984. The Agreement allows the lessee to adjust the green fees to comparable golf courses at least once per year. The current green fees have been in effect since 10/1/94. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Parks and Recreation) Councilmember Alevy stated he would abstain from participation in order to avoid a conflict of interest due to his employment. Jerry Foncerrads, Deputy Director of Parks, stated the increases requested and proposed would only affect non- resident players. Councilmember Rindone stated he would support the resolution because it did not increase fees for residents. RESOLUTION 18130 OI~'FERED BY COUNCILMEMBER RINDONE, reading of the text was waived. Mayor Horton stated she would also support the resolution because it did not raise fees for residents or seniors in the community. VOTE ON RESOLUTION 18130: approved 4-0-0-1 with Alevy abstaining. Minutes November 21, 1995 Page 11 23. REPORT SAN MIGUEL RANCH AD HOC CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND SAN MIGUEL RANCH GOALS AND OBJECTIVES - Emerald Properties, Inc. has submitted applications for a General Plan Amendment, a General Development Plan (GDP) amendment, a Sectional planning Area plan, and an Environmental Impact Report for the San Miguel Ranch property. A condition of the previously-approved GDP requires the formation of an ad-hoc citizen's advisory committee to provide input into the planning process. Staff recommends Council: (1) approve the list of nominees; (2) appoint or solicit applications for the at-large and Bonita resident members; (3) approve the proposed guidelines; and (4) accept the Goals and Objectives. (Director of planning) Robert Leiter, Director of Planning, gave a brief background and status of the project and the need for the ad hoc committee. Paul Manganelli, Project Manager, reviewed the major planning issues identified and the goals and objectives for the planning process. · Mark Faulkner, 9255 Towne Center Drive, San Diego, CA, representing Emerald Properties, owner of San Miguel Ranch, stated they took over San Miguel Ranch in July 1994 and during that time evaluated the viability of the project and the future of San Miguel Ranch. They had worked hard with staff regarding goals and objectives for the project and requested Council approval. In addition, they were requesting approval of the members of the citizens input committee they had recommended or recommended by the required organizations. Mayor Herton stated she had a problem with goal 1A, i.e. the proposed elimination of the low density estate housing approved for the area. Mr. Falukner responded that the MSCP was one of the driving factors for the elimination of the estate housing. The 1852 acres in the northern portion of the property was the "most pristine biological area' in the Southbay according to Fish & Game and U.S. Fish & Wildlife. They had been directed by those agencies to look favorably to eliminate any development in that area. One of the original approvals and conditions of the development of the 357 estate lots on the north was a total mitigation of any impact on Sweetwater Reservoir. The 357 large lot units were in the water shed of the Reservoir and it was almost impossible to mitigate that condition. The topography on the project was also extremely rough and expensive. It would be visually inappropriate for mass grading or conventional development. In their evaluation they had tabled that, but had not eliminated that possibility. He recognized that the estate housing was important to Chula Vista and they were looking into other areas within the plan to provide large lots, but not one acre lots. Mayor Herton stated there was a need for one acre lots. She would have a hard time supporting congesting more units into another area. Itwasherunderstandingthatthe environmental agencies weresupposedtobeworkingwith the City regarding the MSCP on approved plans. She questioned why the City would be giving up the estate lots. Mr. Leiter stat~l when the plan was approved, the approvals that were given on the northern portion were conditioned on resolving a lot of the habitat issues because it was recognized that the northern portion had a lot of issues that needed to be further evaluated. It had to be recognized that there were a lot of constraints and that eliminating development in that area, while at the same time providing lower density and estate lots on the southern parcel, might allow the resolution of the habitat issues and provide land uses on the southern side that the City would fred acceptable. They were trade-offs that were being brought to the Council's attention as part of the planning process. Councilmember Rindone shared the Mayor's concerns for the Horseshoe Bend area. He did not feel there should be an assumption that the elimination of the 357 estate lots would mean that they would be added to the southern parcel. He was concerned about the density and community character. Councilmember Alevy commended staff and the applicant regarding the formation of the citizens committee. The MSCP was not a 'done deal' and he questioned if it was not approved if it would affect the project. Mr. Faulkner stated if the MSCP was not apprnved they would have to revert back to the original approvals and mitigation issues. They had been in close negotiation with both the CA Fish & Game and US Fish & Wildlife and they were extremely interested in San Miguel Ranch. No one could answer whether the MSCP would succeed or not. Minutes November 21, 1995 Page 12 Councilmember Alevy questioned if all development was south of the SDG&E property. Mr. Faulkner responded that was a potential. Mr. Goss informed Council that the citizens committee was an even number, i.e. 8 members. It appeared that 4-5 were not residents of Chula Vista. He questioned whether that was the balance the Council wanted on the committee. Councilmember Rindone responded that a second citizen-at-large could be added for a former Councilmember such as Len Moore who had experience with the project. Councilmember Alevy recommended an at-large appointment from the Planning Commission as they would have the background experience with the project. Councilmember Rindone felt after advertising the Mayor would roturn with recommendations of people that had th6 expertise. MOTION: (Rindone) to accept staff recommendations Nos. 3 and 4 (pg. 23-1) with staff to return with the Mayor's recommendation for citizens-at-large (2) and a Bonita resident (1). Mayor Herton recommended that the item be continued until the other individuals were selected by Council. She wanted to review the item more carefully as she had questions regarding several of the objectives. MSUC CRindone/Horton) to accept the report, staff to advertise for two citizens-at-large positions and one Bonita resident. Council to ratify appointments to the committee when the Mayor returned with her recommendations. * * * Council recessed at 8:48 p.m. and reconvened at 9:04 * * * 24A. REPORT PROPOSED OTAY RANCH UNIVERSITY SITE AND RELATIONSHIP TO MULTIPLE SPECIES CONSERVATION PROGRAM (MSCP) AND OTHER HABITAT CONSERVATION EFFORTS - On 11/14/95, Council requested a report regarding the status of the Otay Ranch university site and its relationship to MSCP and other related programs. Council also requested an evaluation regarding the need for consulting assistance in monitoring these issues, as well as broader lobbying efforts regarding the university site. Staff recommends Council accept the report and approve the resolution appropriating funds for retaining a consultant to assist in monitoring habitat planning issues related to the university. (Assistant City Manager and Director of Planning) 4/Sth's vote required. B. RESOLUTION 18132 APPROPRIATING $10,000 FROM THE UNAPPROPRIATED GENERAL FUND BALANCE Councilmember Rindone questioned why the City needed to hire a consultant. Robert Leiter, Director of Planning, responded that staff had been monitoring the various habitat conservation programs and evaluating their impact on the university site. However, it was a combination of doing specific work with regard to the university site to define the area being considered and looking at the specific environmental and habitat issues. Staff felt that a consultant with specific expertise in biology and familiarity with the habitat conservation programs would be beneficial. Councilmember Rindone stated if it was a reoccutTiag issue, when there was a vacancy or staff realignment, staff should look for someone with that background. He questioned if all work related to the siting of the university would be done by the consultant. Mr. Leiter responded that some of the work would be done in-house. RESOLUTION 18132 O/~'FERED BY MAYOR HORTON, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved unanimously. Minutes November 21, 1995 Page 13 25. RESOLUTION 18074 APPROVING CASH ADVANCES FROM THE TRUNK SEWER CAPITAL RESERVE FUND TO VARIOUS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FUNDS AND FROM THE EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND TO THE CENTRAL GARAGE FUND - Over the last few years, the available cash in various city/agency funds & has been depleted beyond a zero balance. This, in effect, is an unrecorded loan against all other city/agency funds. In addition, funds with positive cash balances are earning less interest revenue than warranted due to this practice. It is recommended that the City move towards returning all funds to a positive cash balance as soon as possible and implementing strict controls to not allow any transaction against any cash account which would reduce it below zero. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Finance) Continued from the meeting of 11114/95. Mr. Goss stated he had given Council an overview of the issue at the last meefmg. Councilmember Rindone stated he had prepared questions for the auditor, but they had been prepared with the assistance of the Director of Finance. Robert Powell, Director of Finance, introduced Gary McCormick a partner with Deloitte Touche. ® Gary McCormick, Deloitte Touche, stated the first question - "Was it common practice for government clients to have individual funds with negative cash balances during the year? ". It was not an uncommon practice, but not one they would recommend. Many times when there were cash balances under common control there would be negative balances in some of the funds. The second question - "For at least the last five years the City has followed the practice of booking one day cash advances as of June 30th to all funds having negative balances, the effect un the financial statements is to reflect a zero cash balance in those funds and recognize a cash advance payable in place of negative cash balance, the entry is reversed on July 1st so as to avoid any impact on interest allocation between the impacted funds, are you aware of this practice?". He stated he was not prepared to comment on the purpose, i.e. whether to avoid any impact on interest allocation between the impacted funds. It was inappropriate to show negative cash balances as an asset. That would be true for government agencies and private institutions. When there was a negative balance in a fund it was appropriate to show it as a liability as opposed to an asset. Therefore, there had to be an entry made to record that as a liability. It had been the City's practice to allocate that cash between interfund balance receivable and payable which had been reflected on the financial statements for several years. Councilmember PAndone questioned if the auditors were aware that practice was in place. Mr. McCormick responded that they were aware of the practice. They agreed with the journal entries made on June 30th. He was not personally aware that they were reversed on July 1st. It needed to be done in the year they were doing the audit because it was inappropriate to report in an external financial statement a negative balance. It would be a common practice to maintain the City's records on an on-going basis to show actually what the cash balances were during the year. The third question - "Were you aware of the practice described in Item 2 and do you feel the practices described in Items I and 2 were appropriate?". It was common but not recommended. He would recommend that the cash balances be maintained in a positive direction. There were many institutions that preferred to do it that way. Question four - "As an auditor do you have any responsibility to disclose that condition in either your Opinion, the Notice of Financial Statements, or Management Letter, please explain". It would not be disclosed in their Opinion. The Financial Statements were the management statements of the City and not Deloitte Touche. It was not something that would be seen as a required disclosure and he did not believe it would be found in most financial statements were the practice was occurring. The disclosure that was being made was actually on the face of the Financial Statements and that was where they showed the interfund receivable and payable at year end. Therefore, it was disclosed, but there was not written disclosure in the footnotes, nor, did he feel it would be required that it be disclosed separately. Because it was not an unusual practice or something that was alarming to them he did not believe it was something that would be included in a Management Letter. It was the practice of the City to run the negative cash balances in certain funds. If the agency as a whole had a negative cash balance that might be different. The fifth question - "Would the fact that four major funds were in that condition for at least 3-4 years have any bearing on your response to question 47 ". Absolutely not because it was a common practice for the City to do that during the time they performed the audit. Question 6 was "What type of recommendation if any, would you make to management or the legislative body regarding the practices described, specifically as they related to the major funds with on-going negative balances? ". He would not make a recommendation as he was not currently aware of what the balances were or what had happened since June 1994 which was the last year they had performed any auditing procedures. From their standpoint it was not preferred to run a negative balance, but he I T Minutes November 21, 1995 Page 14 did not see anything particularly wrong with it. It would probably be his recommendation that the City do an allocation of fund advances to cover any negative cash balances. Councilmember Rindone questioned if there was a repetitive action where major funds had negative balances recorded year after year, in addition to trying to reflect a positive cash balance, if it was indicative that there was deficit spending in those accounts. Mr. McCormick responded that would be possible but not necessarily happening. It could simply be that the funds were being pulled together for investment in the general fund where it would receive a higher return. There could be many reasons for negative balances and not necessarily deficit spending. The cash balance would not necessarily hide deficit spending either. On the internal financial statements it would show the true cash balance, it was just inappropriate for the external financial statements to show a negative cash balance. Councilmember Rindone stated it was disturbing when there was an on-going practice of negative balances in major funds in large amounts. He felt that was an indicator of negative spending. Mr. McCormick responded that it could be an indicator, but it depended upon the reason for rnnnlng the negative cash balances. Councilmember Rindone questioned if it happened year after year and the negative cash balances were larger each year if that was an indicator. Mr. McCormick responded it also would depend on what was happening with the investment account, i.e. the investment account could also be growing by a proportional amount. If that was to happen them would not necessarily be any deficit spending. One could not just look at the cash balance and say it was deficit spending, the financial statements would also have to be analyzed. Councilmember Moot requested clarification as to Mr. McCormick's comment that many institutions "do it" that way. Mr. McCormick responded that it was very common for private industry to run negative cash balances in their accounts. It was sometimes done by design, i.e. one of their cash management techniques. Government agencies would do the same thing. It was not uncommon even for the City of San Diego to run negative cash balances. Councilmember Moot questioned if it was Mr. McCormick's recommendation that Council transfer over money so they did not continue with negative cash balances year after year. Mr. McCormick replied that appeared to be the intent of the Council and management. Therefore, that would be his recommendation, it was not from a cash management standpoint. Councilmember Padilia requested clarification as to why it would not be recommended and some of the pitfalls of maintaining it on a chronic level over a number of years. Mr. McCormick responded that it would depend upon the purpose of why it was done. The reason he would not have recommended it was because it was better to have the Council make a positive statement as to what their intent was in dealing with the negative balances. If the intent was to have a negative balance and pool the funds, a cash management technique, it was best Council adopt a resolution as to that as well and have the Director of Finance monitor that. He did not believe that was what had happened and that was why he would make that recommendation. The pitfalls were difficult because it was being monitored and managed, it was not being hidden because the internal financials showed the negative balances. If that account was being buried somewhere else and not be shown as a reclass at year end, in his opinion it could be misleading. He felt management had disclosed that very clearly by showing a separate line item in beth assets and liabilities and describing them as cash advances. The dollar amounts were not that significant from his standpoint as an auditor that they would necessarily had to have had a separate line item. Councilmember Rindone stated staff had indicated that the current City practice warranted change and he appreciated Mr. Powell bringing it to the attention of the Council. He was greatly concerned that it was not brought to the attention of the Council sooner. On 11/1/94 an opinion had been given which stated certain provisions had to be in place, i.e. full disclosure to the Council, interest payments for those accounts making the loans, a pay back plan, Minutes November 21, 1995 Page 15 and the prospect that those accounts loaned to would have the prospective of paying the loans back. When it was a major account with on-going deficits and large deficits it was appropriate to apply those safeguards. That should have been identified to Council and he hoped that would never happen again. Council should be apprised and given options to consider. The reserve funds were for a specific issue. The quarterly financial reports should include any negative balances and staffs recommendations to future projections. That should also be included in the budget analysis. Councilmember Padilia stal~i in the aggregate the City did not lose money and the overall financial balances of the City were not in the red. He felt it was a big deal in some regards because of what it was indicative of. It was obvious from some of the answers supplied that some of the funds were not done so they could be pooled for a greater rate of return. A sitlmtion was in place where there was unlimited authority for the manager to move funds between accounts. Therefore, the Council was not aware of what was going on and did not have the opportunity to decide how to allocate the funds. It was indicative where the Redevelopment Agency was concerned of unreasonably spending beyond what was reasonably expectexl in revenues in certain funds. That was deficit spending. The report acknowledged that there was a pwblem and it needed to be fixed. Therefore, Council was being asked to look at taking reserve funds to correct the situation. He questioned what would happen if the City did not have a reserve fund and what the impact would be on the general find. Mr. Powell responded that the next alternative would be to seek a source of funds outside of the City on a loan basis. Given the Agency's fiscal status he did not feel the City would be able to obtain such a loan without the General Fund as a co-signer, it would be an expensive loan. Councilmember Padilia stated if the Agency defaulted on the loan the general fund would be responsible for the loan. There was some exposure to the general fund due to over spending in large accounts in the Redevelopment Agency. It could be corrected and he understood what was being done and the magnitude of the problem. The relationship of the Redevelopment Agency fiscal picture to the general fund was the real problem. Mayor Horton did not feel that interpretation was correct. Councilmember Padilia responded that was his opinion. The Council could not solve problems until they agreed what they were. It was important to acknowledge the relationship between the Agency and general fund and what the potential impacts were. If it was not a problem the item would not have been brought forward to Council with recommended changes. He commended Mr. Poweil for bringing the item forward to Council. He did not appreciate being put in the position of having to take from a restricted fund to correct a situation that should have never happened. Councilmember Moot stated Council had been going over the Redevehipment Agency issues for over half the time he had been on the Council, He understood it the first time and that it was something that needed to be corrected. He also understood that the item before them was a symptom of that same issue. He felt all Council understood that it needed to be corrected and that it was serious. There was a continuing obligation for bonds on Town Centre I and II of over $1 million/year for 20 years. That created a debt, the economy turned down, and redevelopmerit projects dried up. It had to be dealt with and the Council had developed a plan to deal with it and he felt they needed to move on. RESOLUTION 18074 OFFERED BY COUNCILMEMBER MOOT, rending of the text was waived, passed and approved 3-2 with Padilia and Rindone opposed. 25.1 ORDINANCE 2655 AMENDING CHAPTER 5.20 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW IN CHULA VISTA ANY FORM OF GAMBLING ALLOWED AT ANY OTHER LOCATION WITHIN THE STATE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF AND QUALIFICATIONS UNDER A GAMBLING PLAN ADOPTED BY RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL (first readin2'} - It has come to the attention of the City Attorney that the State has adopted SB100 which will become effective on and after 1/1/96 and which proports to prohibit cities from amending their gaming ordinance to expand gaming in that jurisdiction for at least three years. This prohibition on local control of gaming will probably be extended beyond 1999 if a comprehensive scheme for the regulation of gaming is allowed in the State. Staff recommends Council place the ordinance on first reading and schedule a special meeting for the second reading. (City Attorney) Mr. Booganrd stated there were two proposed amendments to the ordinance before Council. The first amendment would allow the manager and police chief to have mandatory input to any gaming plan or amendments to it that Minutes November 21, 1995 Page 16 Council would consider. No gaming plan could be considered except after a public hearing and receiving comments from the police chief and city manager. Under the gaming plan it would be mandatory that the chief of police would have veto authority over the permittee. The second change would add text under Section 5.20.010 similar to the text for sports book, casino gaming, and video gaming to on-site and satellite horse and dog wagering. The ordinance was a provision to protect the Home Rule provision of the City to license and regulate gaming and until a gaming plan was adopted it could not go into effect. Provisions of SB 100 were brought to staffs attention by the current licensee requesting various expansions of the cardroom ordinance ~ allow them more tables, greater hours, greater number of players per table, and larger wages. hi order for the ordinance to go into effect Council would have to place it on first reading with a second reading before the end of November so the 30 day referendum period following the adoption of the ordinance would allow it to become effective prior to 1/1/96. Afar reviewing the proposed changes with the cardroom licensee, they had asked for a slightly less risk amendment to the ordinance in five categories they had been soliciting changes in. Compromise language stated "The gaming plan would have to specifically address the subject matter of the section and then, only to the extent allowed in the gaming plan, if the gaming plan was more restrictive than these provisions". The City Manager concurred that the change was acceptable and did not pose any greater risk to the City and he concurred. The applicant wanted to add to Section 5.20.010 five things the gaming plan should try to address. He did not have a problem with the expansion of the list, but wanted the language of Section 5.20.010 to be amended to read "Which gaming plan shall contain such regulations as Council deems appropriate including, but not limited to, the following elements ..... ". That would give Council greater authority to expand or contract such regulations as they felt appropriate. Councilmember Rindone questioned if the proposal by one of the licensees was a place holder so that if a gaming plan was developed those five items would be considered for inclusion. Mr. Beogaard responded that the difference between their proposal and his proposal required a subsequent adoption of a gaming plan that specifically authorized more players per table. Their proposal attempted to enact that change at the present time, but it would not become effective until a gaming plan was adopted. The gaming plan could, if Council wanted, be more restrictive. Under their plan it was an ordinance change that allowed the expanded fights at the present time, but would not be effective until the gaming plan was adopted at a later date. The proposal delegated authority to regulate gaming by a subsequent resolution which could expand their rights. It was a technical enhancement of his proposal and reduced the argument that the licensee's rights were enhanced by the ordinance before the effective date of SB100. ® Rod Davis, 2:t3 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, representing the Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce, stated the business community was concerned with another run at Home Rule by the State. He felt it was a situation where the State was setting itself up as the one and only licenser of gaming in the State and taking the revenues. The Chamber supported the control of gaming by the people who had to live with the consequences and would receive the benefit. Personally, he preferred not having to go outside of the City in order to gamble. ® Michael A. Green, 535 'H' Street, Chula Vista, CA, representing Village Club Cardroom (Harvey Souza), stated the language submitted was to make sure that they preserved their fights. The law sla~.,d that there could be no amendment to an ordinance which would expand gaming. He hoped staff would return on 12/19 with a gaming plan for Council review so they could have something in place so they could be certain they avoided any problem with SB100 as it regarded cardrooms. Councilmember Rindone questioned if action by Council at that time would be an ordinance and, therefore, require a 30 referendum period before becoming effective. Mr. Beogeard responded that under the authority of the ordinance the Council would adopt a resolution instituting a gaming plan and would be able to amend that with a resolution. Any rights granted the third week in December would be done by a resolution, but he was uncertain that met with the schedule as set forth by the Police Chief. Mr. Goss stated the present cardroom ordinance specifically limited the number of tables and questioned if the number of units would be limited in the future or based upon the present formula. Mr. Boogeard replied that any amendment or additional number of units would be set forth in the gaming plan. The number of tables could be expanded by the resolution in the gaming plan. Councilmember Pedilla stated he was not comfortable with any ordinance that expanded gaming within the City. He understood Mr. Green and his client's perspectives in terms of business and competition. It was clear that Minutes November 21, 1995 Page 17 SBI00 would limit competition. He further understood the mochanism that would be employed in order to preserve control for the next three years and possibly beyond on a Statewide level if the State approved gaming or expanded gaming. He would not be surprised to see moves by the State to remove the cities land use authority and other authority cities had regarding gaming establishments. He was very concerned regarding the potential of having the City tie it's economic hopes to gaming or gambling because he would not support the expansion of cardrooms, casino gambling, video gambling, etc. at any time. He did see the utility of the issue regarding Home Rule versus the State taking the local authority away. In cases of major expansions of gaming within the State he questioned if Council would suppert language, if a measure was presented to the citizens, a concurrent ballot questioned asking the public if they wanted gaming expanded within the City. That would allow for Home Rule and also let the citizens affected by major expansions of gaming to decide what they wanted for their community. Councilmember Alevy stated he respected Councilmember Padilla's concerns. He supperted the item in order to maintain Home Rule. Whether any of them were on the Council at the time, the issue of a major casino in Chula Vista, would require public discussions and hearings and would not be automatically passed. Mayor Horton stated no Councilmember was supporting a Las Vegas type of atmosphere for Chula Vista. Councilmember Moot stated gaming was the top issue at the League of California Cities meeting. There was no doubt at a State level that they wanted to have total control and revenues generated. He felt there would be a great debate as to whether the State would adopt casino gambling. It was only prudent for the City to not leave those decisions in the hands of other people. The Council needed to protect their ability to control what was good for the City. Councilmember Padilia stated if the State was going to take control from local jurisdictions they were going to do it and nothing was going to prevent it from happening. By taking action the Council was not absolutely securing local control over gaming issues. In terms of SB 100, Council was doing what they had to do, but it would not stop the State from taking action. He would feel more comfortable with language that stated if there was legislation passed that approved wide-spread gaming that it go to the voters of the City and not just require three votes by the Council. Mr. Boogaard stated if Council wanted greater control they could require a super-majority vote of Council, multiple public hearings, etc. He recommended Council amend the proposed ordinance by changing Section 5.20.001 to read in the first paragraph "Which gaming plan shall contain such regulations as the Council deems appropriate including, but not limited to, the following 12 items: 1) types of gaming allowed, including but not limited to card games, on-site horse and dog wagering, sports book, casino games, video gambling, etc.; 2) hours and days of operations; 3) location of gaming; 4) auditing of gaming establishments; 5) licensing fees; 6) maximum number of players per table; 7) bets and wagers permitted; 8) charges for gaming; 9) licensing, including number of licensees and consolidation; 10) drinking of the intoxicating beverages; 11) maximum number of tables on premises; and 12) every aspect or operation of gaming establishments". Amend Section 5.20.230 to include the language in his supplemental memo of 11/17 dealing with on-site and satellite horse and dog wagering. Amend Section 5.20.110, 120, 150, 180, and 190 as set forth on the information distributed to Council incorporating the proposed cousensns language that the City and existing licensee agreed upon. ORDINANCE 2655, AS AMENDED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY, PLACED ON FIRST READING BY COUNCILMEMBER ALEVY, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved 4-1 with Padilia opposed. Mr. Boogaard stated a special meeting would be required for the second reading of the ordinance. Mayor Horton stated a special meeting would be called on 11/28/95 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in order to consider the second reading of the ordinance. ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR Items pulled: none. The minutes will reflect the published agenda order. Minutes November 21, 1995 Page 18 OTHER BUSINESS 26. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT{S) ® Mr. Goss staled there was a vacancy on the Otay Water District Board and they were asking for recommendations. Staff was preparing an outline of the boundaries to Council review. 27. MAYOR'S REPORT(S} · Ravie~rmg the City's Affordable Housing Policy in reference to AB1715. Continued from the meeting of 11/14/95. Mayor Horten stated AB1715 amended the existing housing element law and established a pilot program for San Diego County that allowed local governments within the jurisdiction of SANDAG to self-certify compliance of their housing element. In addition to self-certification the legislation provided a mechanism ~'om which local jurisdictions could count the following types of activities as their portion of the regional fair share housing needs beyond the coustmction of new housing units: acquisition, rehabilitation, rental or ownership assistance, etc. She wanted staff to look into changing some of the City's existing policies to consider an emphasis on rehabilitation of existing housing stock in the older sections of the community so that those areas would not become blighted in the future. The City would still be providing and securing housing for low income families and deemphasing some of the prior goals of concentrating a lot of the new low income housing in one area. She wanted to enhance and expand the existing rehabilitation program. Mr. Goss recommended that staff present policy options for Council review. Both programs were currently be'mg done and it was a matter of emphasis. a Mayor Horton stated PAL was sponsoring their second annual holiday toy and food drive in conjunction with Sweetwater Union High School District, WalMart, K-Mart, Chula Vista Welfare Council, and Radio Slution Z-90. They would be accepting unwrapped toys at public location sites throughout the City. · Ratification of appointment to the International Friendship Commission ~ Anthony Ciotti, St. MSUC (Itorton/Alevy) to appoint Anthony Ciotti, Sr. to the International Friendship Commission. 28. COUNC1L COMMENTS Councilmember Rindone ® Councilmember Rindone hoped everyone would take some time to pause during the holiday season to express appreciation for their blessings. ADJOURNMENT ADJOURNMENT AT 11:30 P.M. to a Special Meeting on Tuesday, November 28, 1995 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, and thence to the Regular City Council Meeting on December 5, 1995 at 4:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. A Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency convened at 10:38 p.m. and adjourned at 10:41 p.m. CLOSED SESSION Council recessed at 10:38 p.m., met in Closed Session at 10;45 p.m., and reconvened at 11:29 p.m. 29. CONFERENCE W1TH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING: 1. Existing litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 · Chula Vista and nine other cities vs. the County of San Diego regarding solid waste issues (trash litigation). Minutes November 21, 1995 Page 19 · Legal strategies affecting Chammas, Fritsch and Christopher. (Following this item, them may be public action taken to appropriate funds for litigation.) RESOLUTION 18131 APPROPRIATING $334,340.16 FOR LITIGATION COSTS 2. Anticipated litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 · Metro Sewer Adjustment Billing (water reclamation and expansion costs) and EPA lawsuit. MSUC {Horton/Moot) m amend and approve the resolution appropriating $150,000. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR - Pursuant to Government Cede Section 54957.6 · Agency negotiator: John Goss or designee for CVEA, WCE, POA, IAFF, Executive Management, Mid-Management, and Um'epre. sented. Employee organization: Chula Vista Employees Association (CVEA) and Western Council of Engineers (WCE), Police Officers Association (POA) and International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF). Unrepresented employee: Executive Management, Mid-Management, and Unrepresented. SALE AND DISPOSITION OF REAL PROPERTY - Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 · Franchise for Otay Water District for Streets and Right-of-Way. · Purchase of property from R. E. Hazard Contracting Company, 1855 Maxwell Road, Chula Vista, CA. 30. REPORT OF ACTIONS TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION - No reportable actions were taken in Closed Session. Respectfully submitted, BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CMC/AAE, City Clerk by: Vicki C. Soderquist, C~eputy City Clerk I r