Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-11-1992 Minutes MINUTES MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING JUNE 11, 1992 COUNCIL CHAMBERS This is the time and place set for an adjourned regular meeting of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino from the adjourned regular meeting held at 9:00 a.m., on Monday, June 8, 1992, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. The City Clerk has caused to be posted the Order of Adjournment of said meeting held on Monday, June 8, 1992, and has on file in the office of the City Clerk an affidavit of said posting together with a copy of said Order which was posted at 3:30 p.m., Tuesday, June 9, 1992 on the door of the place at which said meeting was held. The adjourned regular meeting of the Mayor and Common Council was called to order at 9:00 a.m., Thursday, June 11, 1992, by Mayor Pro Tempore Hernandez in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. ROLL CALL Roll call was taken by Deputy City Clerk Jones with the following being present: Mayor Pro Tempore Hernandez; Council Members Estrada, Reilly, Hernandez, Maudsley, Minor, Miller; City Attorney Penman, Deputy City Clerk Jones, City Administrator Clark. Absent: Mayor Holcomb; Council Member Pope-Ludlam; City Clerk Krasney. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Phil Arvizo, Executive Assistant to the Council. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The pledge of allegiance was led by Council Member Miller. MC-839 AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AMENDING CHAPTER 2.02 OF THE SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE OFFICE OF THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR, AND DECLARING THE URGENCY THEREOF. Uroencv Discussion ensued relative to the authority of the City Administrator as outlined in urgency Ordinance MC-838 adopted on June 8, 1992. It was pointed out that as a result of a series of meetings with the City Attorney, City Administrator, and the Council committee comprised of Council Member Estrada, 1 6/11/92 Chairperson of the Ways and Means Committee; Council Member Maudsley, Chairperson of the Legislative Review Committee; and Council Member Minor, Chairperson of the Personnel Committee, a consensus was reached on a new urgency ordinance. The new urgency ordinance provides language which clearly indicates that the City Administrator will continue to report directly to the Mayor. The Council assured ~ll of the City Administrator, their positions, nor their subordinates. department heads under the authority that the ordinance does not affect supervisory responsibility to their COUNCIL MEMBER At 9:07 a.m., Council meeting and POPE-LUDLAM ARRIVED Council Member Pope-Ludlam arrived took her place at the council table. at the At the Council committee meeting discussions were also held regarding ways of successfully maintaining a line of communication between the Mayor's Office and the City Council. It was recommended that a committee be created to meet with the City Administrator, with the approval of the Mayor, on a regular monthly basis, to discuss issues and concerns of the Mayor and the Council, and that these concerns be brought to the Council via the Office of the City Administrator. City Attorney Penman advised the Council that the ordinance which created the position of the City Administrator contained provisions inconsistent with the City's Charter, in that the ordinance allowed the City Administrator to be supervised by both the Mayor and Council; and that the City Administrator have responsibility over the City's budget. However, the Charter provides that the Mayor is the executive officer and has supervision powers and the nature of those supervisorial duties under the Charter are reserved to the Mayor; and that the responsibility of the City's budget belongs to the City Clerk. Mr. Penman further stated that Ordinance MC-838 corrected the inconsistencies and made the position of City Administrator a coordinating ministerial function. After a consensus of the City Administrator and City Attorney, language in the newly proposed ordinance was changed to include the word "implement" in conjunction with the word "coordinate" throughout the ordinance. Also, the following language was added to the ordinance " . including but not limited to the Mayor's authority of general supervision ". Mr. Penman stated that with the above-mentioned changes the newly proposed ordinance is consistent with the Charter and is not inconsistent with the vote taken by the public on June 2, 1992. 2 6/11/92 City Attorney Penman stated that on Tuesday, June 2, 1992, the voters considered an amendment to the City's Charter, and if passed would have established the position of City Administrator in the Charter, and would have also given the City Administrator specific supervision over all department heads. The voters voted that Charter amendment down by fifty-six percent. The voters had an opportunity to vote on the concept which was a change in the form of City government from the Mayor and Council form to a Quasi-City Administrator jorm. Mr. Penman further stated that if the Charter amendment had passed, the City Administrator would have authority to fire City department heads with a five vote approval from the Council. Council Member Estrada made a motion, seconded by Council Reilly, that said urgency ordinance be adopted. Concern was expressed that the Charter amendment should have been presented before the voters as a separate ballot measure. It was also stressed that another legal opinion should be obtained regarding the City Attorney's interpretation of the City Administrator's ordinance. The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: Members Estrada, Reilly, Hernandez, Maudsley, Miller. Council Members Minor, Pope-Ludlam. Absent: None. Council Nays: REQUEST TO REMOVE POLITICAL SIGNS (New Business) Mayor Pro Tempore Hernandez directed that the City Clerk write letters to Mr. Granlund and Judge Wilde requesting that they remove their political signs. FISCAL YEAR 1992-92 BUDGET REVIEW (1) City Administrator Clark reviewed the approved recommendations identified during the Monday, June 8, 1992, budget hearing. Three items approved were contingent upon a legal opinion from the Economic Development Agency's Special Counsel as follows: 1) The use of EDA funding for Community Against Drugs program; 2) The ability to bill EDA for a Police Officer in the Mall; and 3) The ability to reimburse EDA for Enterprise Zone fee waivers. With the action taken by the Council, there still remains a deficit of $755,000. Ms. Clark requested on behalf of the Mayor that no final action be taken today. She stated that the Mayor has specific suggestions he would like the Council to consider before making a final decision on the 1992/93 budget. The Mayor has expressed support to establish a graffiti tax; to finish the work at the City cemetery, or prepare to sell it; to re-evaluate the revenues received from the sale of the current police facilities to EDA; and to discuss the State of California's decision relative to the use of PERS funds. 3 6/11/92 PERS Funds City Administrator Clark explained that the State of California has made a decision concerning use of the State and public employees retirement funds (PERS). That decision by the State would hand back to the City of San Bernardino approximately $8 million that have been paid to fund the retirement of City employees. That $8 million was set aside for automatic cost of living raises for retired employees. Retired employees throughout the State challenged the State's decision. However, the State's decision was upheld in court and there mayor may not be an appeal. Ms. Clark stated that the Mayor strongly supports the City placing the money into a liability reserve rather than to include those funds in the 1992/93 budget. Prooertv Taxes Ms. Clark apprised the Council of a pending situation that could be very devastating to the City. She stated that the State's budget conference committee has proposed a $1 billion shift in property tax revenues from cities, counties and special districts to schools; and a $100 million shift from cities to counties. The problem the City will face is that legislators are planning to change legislation and require more property tax money that the City would receive go to schools, thereby allowing a reduction in State aid to schools. Inland Valley DeveloDment Aoencv - IVOA Shauna Clark, City Administrator, explained how the City is accounting for the property tax increment funds generated by the Inland Valley Development Agency. She stated that the city's actual portion of the property tax revenue is 11% of the $2.7 million which equals approximately $275,000. The $275,000 has been disbursed to the City as part of the normal property tax allocation. These funds have been included in the Finance Department's property tax revenue estimates. PERS Funds Diane Roth, Deputy City Attorney, cautioned the City not to rely on the use of PERS funds, as there is a question of whether or not the City will ever receive the money. Ms. Roth stated that the courts have made a judgement in the cities' favor, but indicated that the money is pending in a State trust fund. City Administrator Clark stated that the PERS funds have not been included in the City's 1992/93 budget. 4 6/11/92 Andy Green, Finance Director, explained that a majority of the PERS funds are in the possession of the State. The City has a credit amount that would normally be paid to the State as the City's normal PERS contribution. The State has informed the City not to pay the contribution, but rather the State will credit the City's reserve account. The City's contribution to PERS is approximately $300,000 for every payroll period. The City is withholding approximately $1 million in PERS contribution payments. , Semi-Monthly Payroll City Administrator Clark stated that in February, 1992 discussion was held regarding reducing the payroll transaction costs by having fewer pay periods. It was suggested that the City change its payroll structure from every other Friday to twice a month, which would reduce the payroll periods from 26 to 24 per year. Ms. Clark explained that a situation occurs every twelve years, when City employees receive an extra pay check under the every other Friday pay cycle. That extra pay period would cost the City an additional $3.4 million. As a result of last year's budget hearing, it was recommended that the City create a reserve in the amount of $133,000 per year in anticipation of the extra pay period. Ms. Clark stated that in view of the proposal to change the payroll cycle from an every other Friday to a semi-monthly pay cycle, the reserve of $133,000 would be eliminated from the budget. As meet and confer sessions with Union representatives were held, employees pointed out that they felt that not receiving the extra pay cheCk that occurs every twelve years is a take away. Ms. Clark pointed out that the semi-monthly payroll plan would create across the board savings for the City and would have minimal impact on City employees. Christmas Closure City Administrator Clark stated that as a cost-saving measure, it was suggested that City Hall should close during the Christmas week. However, several departments have indicated that they will not be able to participate in this proposal. Discussion ensued regarding the number of extra board employees or part-time employees that do not receive benefits, and the number of employees that would be affected if City Hall closed during the Christmas week. It was pointed out that several departments not located within the City Hall building have considered closing during Christmas week. A concern was expressed that if the Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department considered closing during the Christmas week, s 6/11/92 employees working at the recreation centers would be impacted and would also impact the community who depend on child care services provided by the centers. City Administrator Clark indicated that the proposal to close City Hall was strictly aimed at departments within the building. She suggested that as an alternative, the Council could issue a policy directive to require all recreation centers to retain normal hours du~ing the Christmas closure week. Chris Gonzales, President, General Employees Union, stated that Union employees share concerns on the Volunteer Time Off Program; semi-monthly payroll conversion; and the closure of City Hall. He stated that surveys have been distributed to City employees requesting their input on these issues. Mr. Gonzales indicated that more time is needed in order to tally the results of the surveys and present this information to the Council. City Administrator Clark stated that June 30, 1992 is the final day to adopt the 1992/93 budget. She stated that the Council have set a tentative date of June 17, 1992 for another budget hearing and inquired if June 17th would allow Mr. Gonzales ample time to complete his survey. Chris Gonzales stated that June 17, 1992 sufficient time to tally the survey results and information to the Council. would allow present the COUNCIL MEMBER POPE-LUDLAM ARRIVED At 10:09 a.m., Council Member Pope-Ludlam arrived at the Council meeting and took her place at the council table. Mr. Gonzales explained the need for greater cooperation among department managers and requested that the City Administrator prepared a letter encouraging all department heads to ensure that their employees return the surveys in a timely manner. City Administrator Clark explained that she had received a request from Mr. Gonzales seeking co-sponsorship of the survey. She stated that the literature addressed items that had not been discussed in meet and confer sessions and since she had received notice regarding her status as City Administrator, she felt that she had no authority to co-sponsor the survey. Ms. Clark requested authorization from the Council to co-sponsor the survey with AFSCME, and to use City funds to copy and distribute the surveys. Chris Gonzales clarified that the surveys have been distributed, but that he needs assistance in gaining the cooperation from department heads to ensure that each employee receives the survey. 6 6/11/92 Mayor Pro Tempore Hernandez directed the City Administrator to investigate the status of the surveys and request that department heads distribute the surveys to their employees and encourage participation with the Union. Ms. Clark requested that the City Administrator's Office be given an opportunity to review and retain access to the surveys. Mr. Gonzales agreed' to deliver the surveys to the City Administrator prior to the next Council meeting. Brian Hagman, Business Agent, General Employees Union, Council 36, 459 4th Street, #12, San Bernardino, Ca, stated that Union members are requesting that all employees, including Police Fire, and safety employees participate in the Christmas closure program. City Administrator Clark pointed out that the City is under constraints imposed by Charter Section 186 relative to Police and Fire safety employees. The City Attorney has also prepared a written legal opinion that indicate Fire and Police employees cannot participate in a furlough work program. Discussion ensued regrading how other cities have met the legal requirements to implement furlough programs. City Administrator Clark stated that surveys were conducted on other cities when the City first considered the proposal to close City Hall during the Christmas holiday. The City of San Bernardino is structured differently than other cities in that Fire and Police Department employees' shifts are enumerated by Charter Section 186. Other cities do not have fire, police and safety employees' shifts enumerated in their Charter. Diane Roth, Deputy City Attorney, stated that as long as the City hold meet and confer sessions with Union representatives there aren't any legal obstacles in proceeding with the proposal to close City Hall during the Christmas holiday, except for Charter 186 provisions. COUNCIL MEMBER POPE-LUDLAM EXCUSED Council Member Pope-Ludlam left the Council meeting. Discussion ensued relative to creating a voluntary contribution program that would enable employees to contribute a certain amount of their over-time pay back to the City. COUNCIL MEMBER MINOR EXCUSED At 10:13 a.m., Council Member Minor left the Council meeting. 7 6/11/92 Bob Oquendo, Firefighter for the City of San Bernardino, stated that employees in the Fire Department are concerned about the City's financial condition. He stated that employees in the Fire Department would like to participate in the give back proposal, but are unable to do so because of the restric _ons imposed through the Fair Labor Standards Act. Mr. Oquendo s ~ted that many of the Fire Department employees had concerns reld~ive to the semi-monthly program that had been addressed during meet and confer sessions with the City. COUNCIL MEMBERS MINOR AND POPE-LUDLAM RETURNED At 10:16 a.m., Council Members Minor and Pope-Ludlam returned to the Council meeting and took their places at the council table. City Administrator Clark stated that she had received a suggestion that employees volunteer their over-time instead of receiving monetary compensation from the City. Ms. Clark stated that the proposal appears feasible, but warned that the City cannot implement such a proposal, because employees are protected under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Employees who work overtime are required by law to receive time and one-half in wages. City Attorney Penman requested an opportunity to review the volunteer over-time proposal and come back to the Council with more information. COUNCIL MEMBER POPE-LUDLAM EXCUSED At 10:21 a.m., Council Member pope-Ludlam left the Council meeting. City Administrator Clark answered questions regarding the advantages of implementing a. volunteer time off program. COUNCIL MEMBER POPE-LUDLAM RETURNED At 10:2S a.m., Council Member pope-Ludlam returned to the Council meeting and took her place at the council table. Charles Manning, Fire Department employee, stated that although he suggested that the City consider saving $160,000 by converting to a semi-monthly payroll program, it has been determined that his retirement allotment will be affected. Discussion ensued regarding the structure of the Fire Department and the contributions employees have made to produce cost savings for the City. It was pointed out that Fire Department employees have donated their time in making aesthetic improvements to the station. 8 6/11/92 Letter of ODDOsition Relative to Prooerty Tax Transfer Mayor Pro Tempore Hernandez directed City Administrator Clark to draft a letter of opposition to local Legislators and the Governor relative to the State's proposal to transfer property tax from cities, counties and special districts to schools. PERS Lawsuit - Discussed earlier in the meetina City Attorney Penmap stated that as of Tuesday, June 9, 1992, the Supreme Court has not ruled on the PERS lawsuit. The Supreme Court has until July 20, 1992, to decide whether or not to grant review. Mr. Penman speculated that if review is granted, it could take a year before the case is finally decided. The League of California Cities has admonished cities that receive benefits as a result of the lawsuit, to use the funds to avoid employee 1ay-offs, or to re-hire those employees who have been laid off. Mr. Penman answered questions regarding when the City would receive the money from the PERS lawsuit. He stated that the date of receipt is generally requested by the attorneys representing the employees. However, if the Supreme Court denies review, and there are no additional Federal concerns, and there is no final appeal, it is assumed that the City would be free to commit to the funds. Carousel Mall Security & San Bernardino Community Aaainst Druas. Inc Tim Sabo, Agency Counsel for the Economic Development Agency, answered questions regarding a mechanism of funding security services at the Carousel Mall. Mr. Sabo referred to a letter dated June 10, 1992, which provided a legal opinion with regard to the legal basis for the Redevelopment Agency to utilize tax increment revenues to pay for a full-time police sergeant assigned to the Carousel Mall. He explained that in 1990, several unsuccessful legislative attempts have been made to authorize the use of tax increment revenues to fund law enforcement and community-based programs, but Governor Deukmejian vetoed legislation based on his opposition to use redevelopment moneys to fund local government services rather than capital improvements. Mr. Sabo stated that the payment of the costs of the police sergeant assigned to the mall is a contractual obligation of the Agency pursuant to various agreements executed with the Carousel Mall and should not be considered an operating expense of the City. Mr. Sabo indicated that SB 1330 is presently before the State Legislature, which would allow redevelopment agencies to utilize tax increment revenues for law enforcement programs. 9 6/11/92 Concern was expressed relative to the selection process of funding certain programs when other neighborhood organizations or programs located throughout RDA project areas have not received funding assistance from the City. It was pointed out that better criteria should be provided in determining which organi~ations are to receive financial assistance from the City. IVOA Tax Increment Proceeds Tim Steinhaus, Agen~y Administrator, Economic Development Agency, advised the Council that an agenda item is scheduled for Monday, June 1S, 1992, recommending that the Community Against Drugs program and other programs be funded utilizir.<} Collateralized Mortgaged Obligation Residual (CMO) funds. Tim Sabo distributed documentation to the Mayor and Council relative to the City's share of IVDA proceeds. Mr. Sabo explained that the document entitled " City of San Bernardino Composition of Tax Increment Dollars", provides a breakdown of the IVDA tax increment revenues among the member jurisdictions, the amount contributed by San Bernardino schools, Community College, and other districts, and the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District. The document entitled "City of San Bernardino Composition of Tax Increment Dollars" provides the basis for which calculations were made to determine the actual proceeds the City would receive based on a percentage of property tax paid on incremental assessed value. Discussion ensued relative to the amount of IVDA tax increment proceeds disbursed to the City. It was pointed out that although the actual 1991-92 IVDA tax increment reconciliation indicates that approximately $3S0,000 has been disbursed to the City, in actuality the City has only received $27S,000. The reduction is attributed to charges imposed by the County to collect the City's property taxes. Marty Romeo, Senior Accountant, City Finance Department, answered questions relative to IVDA tax increment proceeds. He stated that IVDA tax increment proceeds have been accounted for, and are included in the City's revised revenue estimates in the General Fund property tax account. Mr. Sabo answered questions relative to the State Legislature's proposal to redirect property tax revenues from cities and counties to schools and how it would affect the City's redevelopment project areas calculation for receiving property tax increment assessments. He stated that the method ct calculating the IVDA tax increment revenues would not chang"'. However, there may be a change in the distribution of the fun- or a change in the way the City can use those funds. He pointL.~ out that the State would most likely redirect unencumbered revenues rather than encumbered funds that have been pledged for redevelopment purposes. 10 6/11/92 Discussion ensued regarding differences in the City's share of property tax increment revenues if the redevelopment project area increased or decreased in size. Mr. Sabo answered questions regarding the status of the proposal to merge all City redevelopment project areas. He stated that Economic Development Agency staff is assembling the information from each redevelopment project area in order to effect one comprehensive amendment. He stated that information should become available by this fall or later in the year. Mr. Sabo added that the proposal to merge the project areas would give the City ability to transfer money from one project area to another and would provide funds for the Central City project area which is currently in debt. RECESS MEETING At 10:S4 a.m., Mayor Pro Tempore Hernandez declared a five- minute recess. RECONVENE MEETING At 11:07 a.m., the adjourned regular meeting reconvened in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. ROLL CALL Roll call was taken with the following being present: Mayor Pro Tempore Minor; Council Members Estrada, Reilly, Minor, Miller; Deputy City Attorney Roth, Deputy City Clerk JOnes, City Administrator Clark. Absent: Council Member Hernandez, Maudsley, Pope-Ludlam; City Clerk Krasney. Mayor Pro Tempore Minor stated that Mayor Pro Tempore Hernandez would not be present during the remainder of the meeting, and that he would assume the duties of Mayor. City Administrator Clark advised the Council that the Ways and Means Committee directed the Police Department to prepare a budget relative to the use of asset forfeiture money. City Hall Liahtina System Ms. Clark presented a proposal to the Council that could save the City additional funds. She proposed that the City convert its current lighting system at City Hall to a retro-fit system. This proposal would require the City to borrow approximately $147,000 from the Sewer Line Construction Fund, and impose a five-year repayment schedule with 7% interest. The difference between the monthly loan payment and the energy savings received from the conversion would result in net savings to the City of approximately $1,000 per month. After five years, the savings would be approximately $SO,OOO per year. 11 6/11/92 Christmas Closure of City Hall City Administrator Clark stated that the proposal to close City Hall during the Christmas holiday would not affect part- time employees. Ms. Clark recommended that the Council proceed with the proposal to close City Hall during the Christmas holiday. She stated that although some offices within City Hall would remain open, City Hall would be closed to the public. Ms. Clark asked the Council to inform her of any specific programs that should be looked at in reviewing the City'S budget. City Administrator Clark answered questions regarding whether or not all employee groups were represented at today' s budget hearing. She replied that the Police Union was informed of the meeting, but there was no representatives present. However, representatives from the firefighters, general employees, and management employees unions were present. CLOSED SESSION The Mayor and Common Council did not recess session during this meeting. (2) to closed ADJOURNMENT (3) At 11: 12 a.m., the adjourned regular meeting adjourned to Monday, June 1S, 1992, at 8:30 a.m., in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. RACHEL KRASNEY City Clerk By D , Deputy City Clerk No. of Items: 3 No. of Hours: 2 hrs. 12 minutes 12 6/11/92