Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1994/06/01 MINUTES OF A SPECIAL WORKSESSION/MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA Wednesday, June 1, 1994 Council Conference Room 6:10 p.m. Administration Building CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Councihnembers Fox, Horton, Moore, Rindone, and Mayor Nader ALSO PRESENT: John D. Goss, City Managa; Brace M. Boogaard, City Attorney; and Vicki C. Soderquist, Deputy City Clerk 2. REVIEW OF DEPARTMENTAL BUDGETS Boards & Commissions, Community Promotions, CIP, Community Development, Police, Other Funds, Open Space, Non-departmental, Debt Service, Planning, and as many carry over items as time permits. Boards and Commissions: Mayor Nader questioned where the specific board/commission budgets were included. Dam Herring, Budget Manager, responded that the budget detail for the boards/commissions was not included in the budget document, but a significant narrative was included. ® Barbara A. Hall, 3665 Bonita Verd~ Drive, Chula Vista, CA, Member of the Resource Conservation Commission, stated she was not representing the RCC as a vote had not been taken due to a lack of quorum. She requested reinstatement of funding for plaques ti>r the historically designated homes in the City. There were currently twenty-three outstanding plaques at a cost of approximately $30/each. They requested the left over funds from the Historical Society to do several plaques each year. Mayor Nader stated the Commission recommendation was for $50.00 more than the City Manager recommended with the additional $50.00 from the Historical Society. Ms. Hall responded that was correct. MS (Moore/Horton) to direct the City Manager tu review the Histurical Site program and number of outstanding plaques needed and report back to Cuuocil with a proposal nn how to purchase the plaques over a three to five year period. The proposul is to include the Montgomery area. Mayor Nader stated he would vote liar the motion. Hc I~lt the issue regarding the detailed budgets for the boards/commissions came up every year. The board/commission requests should be included in the budget packet and the information should not be at odds with what the boards/commissions assumed was presented to Council. He would not be ready to vote on the Boards/Commissions budget until he knew exactly what they had requested. Councilmember Moore felt staff went beyond what was necessary in dealing with the boards/commissions budgets. Any board/commission could take a vote at any meeting to have an item placed on the agenda requesting support from Council for their programs. Councilmember Fox questioned whether the sites in the Montgomery area had been designated. Councilmember Moore stated the intent or' the motion was to provide a proposal on how the plaques would be budgeted, procured and installed and pursue a program in Montgomery. VOTE ON MOTION: approved unanimuusly. Mr. Goss clarified that each summary page of the boards/commissions budgets should be included. He had staff describe the procedure that was ~iMlowed fur the cnrrent year regarding the board/commission budgets. Minutes June 1, 1994 Page 2 Mayor Nader stated the process that was used had been used in tbe past and it was a good process. It was up to the Council to decide what alteration would be made in the bndgets and it was up to the City Manager to make recormnendations to Council on what those alterations would be. Council should have both the board/commission recommendations and City Manager's recommendations before them. There was an appearance that staff had altered the recommendations prior to Council receiving them. Councilmember Moore stated one way to cut back on the board/cominission budgets would be to cut back on staff time, i.e. reduce the number of hours of meetings. Councilmember Rindone stated staff had made a recommendation of 2 % cuts tier all board/commission budgets and he questioned what each 1% equalled in aggregate savings. Ms. Herring responded that 2 % would be $530.00. ® Melody Cernitz, 182 Sierra Way, Chula Vista, CA, representing the Cultural Arts Commission, stated there was a discrepancy between the budget presented by the Commission and the budget submitted by the Parks & Recreation Department on their behalf. The difference was that the Commission was asking for approximately $11,000 while the Parks & Recreation Department stated they were asking fur approximately $40,000. The difference was $30,000 for personnel which the Commission was not asking tilr nor were they in a position to supervise. The $30,000 was the amount needed to make the Cultural Arts Coordinator position a full time position. The Commission strongly endorsed that expenditure, but it would not bc under the Commission but under the Parks & Recreation Department. Of the $11,000 requested, $3,000 of that was laber. lfthe Cultural Arts Coordinator position was made full time, that $3,000 would be deleted from their request. Councilmember Hotton questioned if their request was tier $6,396 excluding the staff person. Ms. C~rnitz responded that was correct. The $10,000 included $4,000 lilt the festival and was not spent by the Con' 'on, it was spent by the Parks & Recreation Department. Mayor Nader questioned if the Comrmssion was recommending the transt~r of $4,000 to the Parks & Recreation Department budget for the festival, Ms. Cemitz responded that was correct. Mr. Goss stated there was a basic budget request of $6,300 and Supplemental Budget Memo #18, minus full time funding for the Cultural Arts Coordinator, of approximately $11,000. There was also a request of another $28,000 from the Parks & Recreation Department to make the Cultural Arts Coordinator full time. Ms. Cernitz stated the recommendation was to deli~r action on the request until information was obtained from the Sweetwater High School District's proposal that the City pay tier a facility manager at the EastLake Performing Arts Center. She felt it was inappropriate to ask a facilities manager to do the work of a coordinator as well when the facilities manager was full time and the coordinator needed to be made fidl time. Mr. Goss stated the point of the recommendation was that there was a limited amount of money for cultural arts expansion. In addition to the Cultural Arts Commission request there was another proposal where the City could get in on the ground floor with a partnership with the high school district in terms of providing staff in exchange for getting free use for period of time of the cultural arts facility. Unti~rtunately, the dollar amounts were not available regarding the level and type of staff person that would be employed by the District. He had been told that the position could be either part-time or full-time. Theretbre, he t~lt the two issues were linked for the coming year. Mayor Nader stated staff was recormnending that Council not take tirm actitm on the Commission request and wait for further information. He questioned if the program described by the City Manager had been presented to the Commission for review. He it was a policy matter and that Council should have a reco~nmendation from the Commission. Ms. Cernitz responded that it had been refitfred to the Commission by Council six months ago. The Commission did , njnary exploration and found that it was not the Commissions position to be discussing it as it was a pets matter. They had found that the priorities fur the use of the hcility would l:all first to the high school Minutes June 1, 1994 Page 3 district and then to the other educational programs within the City beti>re they came to conununity wide activities. The Commission felt the City use would be limited, if at all. Mayor Nader felt it would be prudent ti>r the Commission to call in representatives of the Parks & Recreation Department and school district to see what type of agreement could be reached to accommodate the type of progmmrmng the Comrmsion felt should be available with a report back to Council on whether that was a viable option. Mr. Goss recommended that Council hold off until the exact numbers dealing with the facility manager were available and he was able to present the entire package fi>r Council review. Councilmember Fox stated he was prepared to support the staff recommendation on Supplemental Budget Memo #18 which would give the City more time to obtain the additional intbrmation regarding a possible partnership with the school district. Mayor Nader felt the issue should be referred back to the Cultural Arts Comrmssion to review and advise Council. Councilmember Rindone stated Council did not have adequate intbrmation to ~nake a decision and in fairness to the Comrmssion it should be referred back to staff until the intimnation was available and the definition of "partnership" was established. The partnership should allow an obvious benefit to the community on a regular schedule. MS (Rindone/Nader) to refer buck to stutT with the infiwmutinn presented tu the Cultural Arts Commission so they were aware of what in~rmatinn went tu Cuuncil print to Cuuncil's decision. Councilmember Moore stated he did not see how a conclnsion could be made prior to the end of the fiscal year. The City was supporting cultural arts and staff was looking tilt alternatives. He questioned if there should be a mid- point where staff brought an item they were pursuing to Council for additional policy direction. SUBSTITUTE MOTION: (Moore) approve the star' recommendation and direct staff to move forward in a timely manner. Motion died h~r lack nf seclmd. Mayor Nader said some amount of funding would be going into some cultural arts program and the real issue was going to be what the opportunities were/i~r parreefing with the school district and were those opportunities, at whatever dollar cost, more valuable or less valuable than solne other opportunity tier spending the same amount of restricted dollars. If the intlarmation was not received by 6/21/94 to answer all those questions, he felt staff and the Commission should make a recommendation on what amount of money should be budgeted and set aside with a decision to be made later as to where the best place wnuld be to spend it. That way it would not delay the budget process or result in a supplemental appropriation. Councilmember Moore stated the recommendation received on 6/21/94 should be a mutual agreement. VOTE ON MOTION: approved 4-1 with Moure oppnsed. Ms. Cernitz stated Council had approved additional funding two months ago and the Conunission had not heard from staff as to whether they could use the Coordinators time to write the grants. Jess Valenzuela, Director of Parks & Recreation, stated the problem was that the part time person had reached their 999 hours and there was concern regarding hiring that person on a contract. He had requested a City Attomey's opinion regarding those benefits and would tilllow-up. Councilmember Horton stated she had a problem with the issue. Council had appropriated additional funding because time was of the essence in applying fi~r the grants. She questioned whether the City had missed out on some of the special grants. MSC (Nader/Fox) to trail the Boards and Cumnfission budgets until actual board/commission budgets were given to Council. Approved 4-1 with Monte uppused. Councilmember Rindone questioned if the City Attorney had bc~n requested to review the two potential legal issues regarding personnel, i.e. I) the consultant policy; and 2) the 999 hours fi~r the Cultural Arts Coordinator. Minutes Jane 1, 1994 Page 4 Mr. Boogaard stated he had discussed the issue with the Assistant City Attorney and they f~lt the City should not be contracting with a person after 999 hours because the risk of paying the PERS benefits outweighed the benefits of having that person do the work when someone else could easily dl~ the work without the risk. Councilmember Horton questioned how long ago that discussion had been held. Mr. Boogaard responded that it had been several months ago. If Council wanted to accept the risk and absorb the additional cost, which was approximately 12% - 17% on top of the en~ployment costs, they could absorb the risk and move forward with it. There was so much supervisional conlrol that it would not eliminate the risk. Councilmember Rindone stated one issue was the unacceptable delay of six to eight weeks to get a response from staff. He requested the City Manager review staff procedures to ensure that Council's direction would be carried out. Community Promotions: MS (Horton/Fox) to conceptually approve the Community Promotions budget. Councilmember Rindone stated the Chula Vista Chamber had assisted the City in conducting Harbor Days and he questioned why it was not listed in the budget. Mr. Goss responded that it was included in the Non-Departmental Budget. The thnding tbr the Community Pride Fair was included in the Parks & Recreation budget. Councilmember Rindone felt all community activities should be listed together so the whole picture of what the City was d~j.ng for community promotions could be viewed. He quesfumed why Community Promotions could not be incl, :n Non-Departmental. Mr. C/oss responded that it went back to before his tenure. He wanted to h~ok at the historical data to see if there was any rationale he was not aware of. VOTE ON MOTION: approved unanimously. Capital Imorovement Projects (CIP): Mr. Goss distributed Supplemental Budget Memo #24 dealing with the traffic delineators. Clifford Swanson, Deputy Director of Public Works/City Engineer, reviewed Supplemental Budget Memo #24. Councilmember Fox questioned if the residents on Country Club Drive were the only residents requesting removal of the delineators. Mr. Swanson responded that they were the only residents they were aware tff. If Council wanted to accept their request they would have to list that project as first priority and move other pr~iects down. He t~lt the money could be found based on the lower bids on Otay Valley Road which would ptltcntial ly fi'ee up money in next years budget. Councilmember Moore stated it was not a budgeted project and if it was done they would have to take the funds from something else. He did not see the request competing with the proposed budget. In the past some of the residents had stated they would help to pay for the prqiect. Councilmember Rindone concurred with Councilmember Moore and t~lt Sul~plemental Budget Memo #24 should be placed on the Wish List. He felt there were two lessons to be learned: I) the City should not contribute to the situation in the future; and 2) it was a short cut method that would have to be paid for later. MS (Moore/Rindone) include Supplemental Budget Memu #24 on the Wish List and establish a Council policy thai ~ vtore pylons would be installed in the City without Council approvuL Minutes June 1, 1994 Page 5 Mayor Nader stated he would vote for the motion, but action in the past by Council in certain areas had been a cost effective way to deal with a safety issue. He did not want the motion construed that staff could not make that reconunendation to Council. VOTE ON MOTION: approved unanimuusly. Mr. Goss reviewed the funding proposed tbr the South Bay YMCA aquatic center. He stated Supplemental Budget Memo t/9 listed all the proposed CIP projects. Glen Goerke, 877 Country Club Drive, Chnla Vista, CA, stated residents of Sierra Way and Palomar had spoken the issue of the delineators along with the residents of Country Club Drive. He handed out a letter requesting the replacement of traffic delineators with a permanent stamped concrete alternative. He stated the delineators on Country Club Drive were the only ones in a residential area in the City. * * * Councihnen~ber Fox left the meeting at 7:38 p.m. * * * MSC (Nader/Horton) to reconsider previous Cimncil actim~ regarding the delineators on Country Club Drive. Approved 3-1-1 with Moore opposed and Fnx absent. MS (Nader/Horton) to refer the item, the delinealnrs Im Country Club Drive, to staff for a report back to Council with recommendations as to what wuuld be subtracted t'n~m the 1994/95 CIP budget in order to accommodate that project. Councilmember Rindone questioned if the Mayor would ct>nsider a three to five year phase in tbr all delineators within the City. Mr. Goss responded that staff agreed it should be a phased in prctject over three to tire years. It could well be that in the larger projects using Gas Tax and TransNet fnnds there could be some savings that could be applied to those projects. Councilmember Hotton felt the City needed to pril>rtize <lthcr needs, i.e. sidewalks, curbs and gutters in the Montgomery area, and safety issues. AMENDMENT TO MOTION: (Mnure, agreed tu by the Maker and Second of the Motion) staff to communicate with the residents of the area regarding potential shared costs in order to speed up the project. Mr. Goerke stated that had been previously discussed with the residents and they were opposed to full contribution given the vast nature of the neighborhood. VOTE ON MOTION, AS AMENDED: appruved 4-0-1 with Fox absent. · Greg Cox, 3131 Bonita Road, Suit~ 200, Chula Vista, CA, representing South Bay Family YMCA, suggested that in dealing with the Park Acquisition and Development Funds Council appropriate an additional $200,000, i.e. $50,000/year tYom the next t~:~tt,- succeeding fiscal year budgets. They were supportive of the City Manager's recommendation fbr zero funding lbr the current year. They suggested that in the last three fiscal years, i.e. 1996/97, 1997/98, and 1998/99 f~nding be raised t'r~m $50,000/year to $60,000/year. That would give them $250,000 from the PAD fees and a total of $250,000 from Community Development Block Grant funds. They would then challenge the Metro YMCA to try to get matching thnds. * * * Councilmember Fox returoed ta the meeting at 7:50 p.m. * * * Councilmember Moore felt the operation and maintenance of the facility would eventually out shadow the construction costs. It was a win/win situation l~.~r the City if they had a good contract with the YMCA. Mr. Cox stated the comn~tment made to the City was that they would submit whatever rates they would charge to Council for approval which was similar to what was dt>ne with the golf course. The ongoing costs of operation and maintenance would be costs paid by the YMCA. Councilmember Fox stated he wanted to clarif~ that they were asking lbr the future year appropriations contingent upon the partnership coming to an agreement as to tile match and f~e arrangements. Minutes June 1, 1994 Page 6 Mr. Cox stated that was correct, they hoped to have an agreement buck tt> Conncil on the same night Council took action on the budget. Mr. Goss stated he had no objections to the last three years of timdine being at $60,000/year. It would be contingent upon a satisfactory partnership understanding. MSUC (Nader/Fox) to approve the City Manager's revised rec0mfnendatinn. Mr. Goss responded that there were several options tbr funding of the gym. Council had appropriated $250,000 from the Block Grant funds. Council had the option to connnit, as a policy matter, the remaining $750,000 from 1995/96 Block Grant funds; use the Park Acquisition Development funds in the western part of the City; or a combination of the Block Grant funds and the PAD funds. MS (Moore/Nader) to approve staff recommendation, i.e. make a tentative cummitment of 1995/96 Block Grant funds, up to $770,600 for the Otay Park gym. Councilmember Rindone questioned what remaining funds would be lefi in the Block Grant funds for distribution next year. Mr. Goss stated there was approximately $1 million in the Block Grant CIP funding. That would constrain the Councils flexibility of available money for other projects to approximately $250,000. VOTE ON MOTION: approved unanimously. Councilmember Moore questioned if the southern side of the street would be completed when the auto park was ready to open. He felt if the animal shelter was holding the pr~ject up something should be done as the auto park would~be a major source of revenue for the City. If the prt~iect was being slowed down it should be brought to Cou ~r review and possible policy direction. John Lippitt, Director of Public Works, stated he had a meeting with the parties involved to see what the problem was and how to better the situation. The utility poles were the problem. Councilmember Moore referred to the major changes listed li>r Otay Lakes Road and East "J" Street. Mr. Swanson stated the GMOC had pointed out that the Ietl turn lanes were the m~jor reason the intersection dropped below the threshold standards. That intersection was proposed in next y~ars CIP budget. Councilmember Moore questioned if the City or Council had dime anything policy wise regarding the ADA requirements on street paving that required the City to do m~jor changes to sidewalks versus driveways. He felt the City should develop a policy which they could then take to the League, state legislators, and federal government which stated the ADA went too far regarding paving and overlays and requiring reconstruction of sidewalks. He felt cities should request some type of waiver. He felt the timdine could be nsed in other areas. Councilmember Horton questioned why the CIP improvements in the Sonth Chula Vista area along Third Avenue from Orange to Main would be asphalt instead of concrete. She also questioned the expenditure of monies tbr a project that would have to be done all over again. Mr. Swanson responded that the right-of-way was not available in all the locations in order to put the sidewalk in at its ultimate location. In some locations there were buildings in the right-of-way that would have to be moved and in other areas the right-of-way would have to be purchased. It was a commercial area and as the property was redeveloped to higher more intense uses the developers would be required to put in the improvements and dedicate the right-of-way. The SANDAG funding was for pedestrian facilities only. If the City put in concrete curb, gutter, and sidewalk a major funding source would have to be lbund. Councilmember Hotton stated she had been given a petition by the residehis in th~ area stating they would be willing to look at an assessment district to get the proper improvements in place. Mr. itt stated staff tried to get an assessment district on Third Avenne and there was a lot of opposition at that timt Minutes June 1, 1994 Page 7 Councilmember Horton questioned how long it would take betbre the improvements were in place, recognizing that it was a major safety problem. Mr. Swanson stated he did not have the schedule, once the City received the right-of-way it could be done within one month. Mr. Goss questioned what the consequences would be of deleting the asphalt project and moving forward with concrete, other than the loss of SANDAG funding and additional costs. Mr. Swanson stated there was a building in the way and the City would have to acquire right-of-way on almost the full length of the street. He felt it could delay the pr~iect fi}r up to one and one-half years as it was a major project. Councilmember Rindone questioned what the h~t track schedule was. Mr. Swanson stated staff would have to report back as he was unaware of what the status was of the on-going negotiations for the right-of-way. Mr. Lippitt stated staff would also report back on the concrete prqiect, i.e. time line, costs, what other projects would have to be delayed, and funding sources. MSUC (Horton/Nader) to direct staff to bring back a report in two weeks nn the status of the right-of-ways on Third Avenue from Orange to Main Streets. Councilmember Moore offered to be part of th~ negotiating team ti>r the right-ol~ways. Police Department: Mr. Goss stated Supplemental Budget Memo g15 dealt with the false alarm program. Staff was looking tbr policy direction from Council as to whether they were roterested in pursuing any of the proposed fees in the budget. Mayor Nader stated he had been told that Administration had frozen positions in Police Dispatch. Mr. Goss stated there were two positions that were recommended to be frozen in the budget which were currently vacant. Rick Emerson, Chief of Police, responded that one position was recommended to be frozen and one position was currently vacant because they had not been able to find a person with the qualities they were looking for. Mayor Nader stated he had heard concerns expressed about stress on those dispatchers that were there and that filling the vacant positions would help increase the efficiency of an already efficient department. Chief Emerson stated at the beginning of the fiscal year they were down five dispatchers so there was significant over time. They currently had two people in a training mode so the picture had changed. They were aware that it was a significant issue. The computer aided dispatch system would also aid in streamlining the operation. They would test during the six month freeze and do the background checks, theretbre, they would be able to fill the position on January 1. Mr. Goss stated there was only one position proposed to be frozen, i.e. a vacant dispatch position. Mayor Nader stated he would be more con~tbrtable with budgeting so that atler the tbur month period the position could be filled. If calls went down or there was no need tbr the position, the decision to hire could be made administratively. He questioned the increase filr an alarm services intern and how it was currently being done. Chief Emerson responded the Crime Prevention personnel was currently handling it. Mayor Nader stated the $7,000 allocation would fi'ee up community service officers so they could do more crime prevention and neighborhood watch activities. It should be understood that the policy decision was not to spend $7,000 on more alarm services, but to free up existing personnel to do crime prevention and neighborhood watch organizing. Minutes June 1, 1994 Page 8 Councilmember Fox stated he would support the request ]br the alarm permit increases as it was a full recovery system. He questioned if the proposed program regarding impounds would reqnire a new staff person. Chief Emerson stated it would not. A lot of cities were charging an administrative fee tbr the work done to discharge a vehicle. It was a service that was already being perthtreed. Councilmember Fox questioned whether Council would be receiving Supplen~ental Bodget Memos on those issues. Mr. Goss stated staff did not want to proceed unless there was support by Council. Councilmember Moore questioned the situation tbr Rohr police. Chief Emerson responded there were currently three guards and staff was recommending zero fbr next year. Staff felt if the traffic came back they could be added. Councilmember Moore felt the false alarm program was great, but that the actual false alarm charges should be reviewed. He hoped that volunteers could be utilized to check ottt the alarm. He also l~lt there should be a separate charge for residents versus non-residents for police reports. He questioned the status of a sub-regional crime lab. Chief Emerson stated they had talked with Sheriff Roache and he wanted to have his own crime lab rather than use regional sites. Councilmember Horton questioned the expenditure l~,~r the hand held intoxometers. Chief Emerson responded the department did not currently have any intoxometers. As of 1 / 1/94 a juvenile thought to hav~ee been drinking could be given a field sobriety test. They did not have to have a .08 alcohol level to suspend thei '~se for one year. The law did not allow fbr bringing.juveuiles into the station lk~r the test. An intoxometer wot put in each of the three sector cars. If it was lbund that ther~ was a greater need staff would address that issue. Councilmember Rindone questioned if there was inlbrmation available on tire number of police on patrol, not just the total number of sworn officers and how that had changed over the last five to ten years. Chief Emerson stated many cities used the officer per 1,000 population ratio and those numbers had remained the same. Chula Vista did not use those numbers, but a staffing model that dealt with response time, number of officers, types ofcalls, priority level ofcalls, etc. As aresult ufthat staff recommended the hiring ofone additional patrol officer. The Department had added, in the last two years, fit~een people with the ma. jority of them going to the patrol division, but not necessarily as beat officers. While the numbers of ufficers assigned to particular beats had not grown dramatically there had been assistance provided by the specialty units to allow the officers to be able to respond to calls for service. Councilmember Fox questioned if the crossing guard at Rohr had been eliminated. Chief Emerson responded that the guard was still there. He had met with Dr. Gill regarding that issue and would be addressing it in the future to see if there was a way to provide that service in some other way. MSUC (Moore/Horton) to conceptually approve the Police Depurt~neut's budget. Mr. Goss stated there were no additional workshops scheduled. The public hearing tbr the budget was scheduled on 6/14/94. One possibility would be to have the hearing and leave flexibility on 6/21/94. The Ibllowing budgets had not been reviewed: Personnel, Planning, Fire and C~nm~unity Dcvch~pment. Related to Community Development was the Redevelopment Agency budget issue. Councilmember Rindone stated the Re, development Agency budget had been trailed three times and he t~lt a specific meet. ~ ~hould be set to deal with it. A specific meeting should also be set to deal with the remaining budgets. Minutes June 1, 1994 Page 9 Mayor Nadcr requested that staff poll the Council to try to set a workshop date. It was the consensus of the Council to hear the Redevelopment Agency budget at the 6/7/94 meeting with the other departments being heard at a special meeting of which the date was yet to be decided. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None OTHER BUSINESS 3. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT(S) - None 4. MAYOR'S REPORT(S) - None 5. COUNCIL COM~IENTS - None AD.IOURNMENT ADJOURNMENT AT 9:18 P.M. to the Regular City Council Meeting on June 7, 1994 at 4:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. Respectl~lly submitted, BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CMC, City Clerk .-,, ,&, ,, by: Vicki C. Soderquist, Deputy~!ty Clerk