Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-21-1992 Minutes MINUTES ~~YOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO REGULAR ~!EETING SEPTEMBER 21, 1992 COUNCIL CHA.~BERS READING OF RESOLUTIONS & ORDINANCES Deputy City Clerk Vale read the titles of all the resolutions and ordinances on the regular, supplemental, and Community Development Commission agendas. The regular meeting of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino was called to order by Mayor Holcomb at 9:31 a.m., Monday, September 21, 1992, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. CLOSED SESSION (1) The Mayor and Common Council did not conduct a closed session at this time; however, the Mayor and Common Council recessed into closed session at 5:48 p.m. (See page 29) ROLL CALL Roll call was taken by Deputy City Clerk Vale with the following being present: Mayor Holcomb; Council Members Estrada, Reilly, Hernandez, Maudsley, Minor, Pope-Ludlam, Miller; City Attorney Penman, Deputy City Clerk Vale, City Administrator Shauna Clark. Absent: None. 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. ANNOUNCEMENT MAYOR HOLCOMB RENOVATION - 701 NORTH "E" STREET POLICE FACILITY (2) Mayor Holcomb recommended that the discussion relative to the renovation of the Police Facility at 701 North "E" Street be continued for two weeks, to October 5, 1992, to allow the architect sufficient time to address all the issues involved with renovating the buildings. Mayor Holcomb recommended that the Council tour the Platt Building at 1:30 p.m. in preparation for the discussion relative 1 9/21/92 to the appeal filed by the Economic Development Agency regarding the proposed demolition of the building. ANNOUNCEMENT COUNCIL MEMBERS REILLY, MAUDSLEY - CLASSIC CAR SHOW MILLER & I;') Council Member Reilly commended those individuals involved in coordinating the Classic Car Show held downtown on September 19 and 20, 1992. He thanked the event sponsors and organizers, and stated his support for such an event next year. Council Member Miller thanked the sponsors of the Classic Car Show, and voiced support for conducting the event next year. Council Member Mauds1ey stated that the Classic Car Show was an excellent family event and voiced his support for conducting the event next year. PUBLIC COMMENTS - ROGER D~MAS (3) Roger Dumas, a resident of San Bernardino, CA, voiced his opposition to the arrest of Mr. Brian Clant. Mr. Clant was arrested at Carousel Mall for removing aluminum cans from the trash for recycling, and was charged with being disruptive. PUBLIC COMMENTS - JIMMY DE VITA (3) Jimmy De Vita, a resident of Rialto, CA, encouraged all citizens to vote on November 2, 1992. PROCLAMATION - A.~ERICAN RED CROSS - INLAND EMPIRE EAST CHAPTER - AMERICAN RED CROSS MONTH - SEPTEMBER 1992 (4) J. Lorraine Velarde, Executive Assistant to the Mayor, read a proclamation declaring the month of September, 1992, as AmGrican Red Cross Month, in recognition of the American Red Cross, Inland Empire East Chapter's dedicated service to the community. Bob Wussler, Executive Director; and Mr. Bulman, Chairman of the Inland Empire East Chapter, accepted the proclamation. PROCLAMATION - ARROWHEAD UNITED WAY MONTH 1992 OCTOBER (4) J. Lorraine Velarde, Executive Assistant to the Mayor, read a proclamation declaring the month of October, 1992, as Arrowhead United Way Month, in recognition of dedicated service to the community. Frank Snedeker, President of Arrcwhead United Way, accepted the proclamation. 2 9/21/92 \. ~- SERVICE PIN AWARD CEREMONY (4) J. Lorraine Velarde, Executive Assistant to the Mayor, read the names of each employee receiving service pin awards. Each employee received a service pin from Mayor Holcomb in gratitude of his/her many years of dedicated service to the City. COUNCIL MEMBER POPE-LUDL~~ EXCUSED Council Member Pope-Ludlam left the Council meeting. WAIVE FURTHER READING OF RESOLUTIONS & ORDINANCES (5) Council Member Maudsley made a motion, seconded by Council Member Minor, and unanimously carried, that further reading of resolutions and ordinances on the regular, supplemental and Community Development Commission agendas, be waived. COUNCIL MINUTES (6) Council Member Maudsley made a motion, seconded by Council Member Minor, and unanimously carried, that the minutes of the following meeting of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino, be approved as submitted in typewritten form: June 17, 1992. OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENT REMOVAL & AUTHORIZATION TO INITIATE PROCEEDINGS INSTALLATION- (7) In a memorandum dated September 10, 1992, Roger Hardgrave, Director of Public Works/City Engineer, stated that the property (s ) in question are located on the north side of Mill Street at "D" Street; on the south side of Sixth Street between "G" and "H" Streets; on the south side of Rialto between "E" and "F" Streets; and will require the construction of curb, gutter, paving, sidewalk, catch basin, driveway approach(s), or a combination thereof. All have been checked and are within the 300 foot maximum as required by Ordinance No. MC-796. The total estimated project cost is $75,600. If the property owner ( s) choose not to do the work, then the construction would go to bid for an outside contract, or be done by the Public Services Department if its work load permits. However, the City would not know who would perform the work until after the property owners involved have been notified to make the improvements and have been given the opportunity to decide who would perform the work. Due to upfront the three years The three the low overall cost, staff recommended that the City contract cost, if necessary, and that the owners have in which to pay the assessment on their tax bills. year time limi t was determined based on the 3 9/21/92 authorization given for the first phase of these Chapter l2. 92 assessment projects, which are tied to Chapter 27 of the Improvement Act of 1911. Section 5895 of Chapter 27 allows the City to collect a maximum of seven percent per annum interest on the unpaid balance which would be done if desired; however, the City can only allow annual installments on assessments which are over $50. In a memorandum dated September 18, 1992, Roger Hardgrave, Director of Public Works/City Engineer, stated that based on past practice, the City may wish to consider absorbing the incidental costs pertinent to the project. Actual construction costs for curbs, gutters, etc., are excluded from the 50% City contribution offered in programs performed under the provisions of Chapter 12.92. Incidental costs include such items as the cost of preparing plans, blueprinting charges, City personnel labor, engineering and inspection services. Council Member Maudsley made a motion, seconded by Council Member Minor, and unanimously carried, that the Director of Public Works/City Engineer be authorized and directed to initiate proceedings for the removal and installation of necessary off- site improvements under the provisions of Chapter 12.92.010(E) of the Municipal Code on the following described parcels of land: 136-193-27; 134-053-07; 136-021-23; .L36-021-24; and that assessments in excess of $50.00 therefor, if any, would be collected in annual installments, not exceeding three years, on the respective County Tax Bills, and that such installments would bear interest at the rate of 7% per annum on the unpaid balance; and that the City absorb the incidental costs pertinent to this project. PAVEMENT LANE TO TRANSFER REHABILITATION - REDLANDS BOULEVARD EAST CITY LIMITS APPROVAL OF FUNDS - $120,000 - ADVERTISE FOR BIDS HUNTS PLANS- (8) In a memorandum dated September 9, 1992, Roger Hardgrave, Director of Public Works/City Engineer, stated that plans for the rehabilitation of the pavement in Redlands Boulevard have been prepared and the project is ready to be advertised for bids. The project consists of cold planing a portion of the existing asphalt concrete, installing fabric and placing asphalt concrete. The total estimated project cost is $342,000. An amount of $222,000 has been allocated in the 1991/92 Measure "I" one-half cent sales tax budget. Supplemental funds in the amount of $120,000 would be needed to fully finance the total estimated project cost. It is recommended that $120,000 be transferred from the "Orange Show Road Arrowhead to Waterman" account, because these engineering design costs would be financed by the Inland Valley Development Agency from funds loaned from SANBAG. 4 9/21/92 Council Member Maudsley made a motion, seconded by Council Member Minor, and unanimously carried, that the transfer of $120,000 from Account No. 129-309-57845, "Orange Show Road, from Arrowhead Avenue to Waterman Avenue," to Account No. 129-309- 57835, "Redlands Boulevard from Hunts Lane to east City limits", be approved; that the plans for rehabilitation of Redlands Boulevard, from Hunts Lane to east City limits in accordance with Plan No. 8756, be approved; and that the Director of Public Works/City Engineer be authorized to advertise for bids. CLAIMS AND PAYROLL (9) Council Member Maudsley made a motion, seconded by Council Member Minor, and unanimously carried, that the claims and payroll, and the authorization to issue warrants as listed on the memorandum dated September 8, 1992, from the Acting Director of Finance, be approved. PERSONNEL ACTIONS (10) Council Member Maudsley made a motion, seconded by Council Member Minor, and unanimously carried, that the personnel actions submitted by the Chief Examiner dated September 11, 1992, in accordance with all administrative regulations of the City of San Bernardino, be approved. JOINT POWERS FINANCING AUTHORITY - REGULAR MEETING (11) Council Member Maudsley made a motion, seconded by Council Member Minor, and unanimously carried, that the regular meeting of the Joint Powers Financing Authority be adjourned to October 19, 1992. RES. 92-377 - RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT TERMINATING THE AGREEMENT FOR THE USE AND OPERATION OF A TENNIS PRO SHOP AT PERRIS HIL~ PARK. (14) RES. 92-378 - RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZ ING THE EXECUTION OF A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH HIGHLAND SENIOR CENTER, HIGHLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL ON AGING, INC. , RELATING TO A NUTRITION FOR SENIORS PROGRAM. (15) RES. 92-379 - AUTHORIZING UNDERSTANDING RELATING TO A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO THE EXECUTION OF A MEMORANDUM OF WITH ADULT DAY HEALTH CARE CENTER NUTRITION FOR SENIORS PROGRAM. (16) 5 9/21/92 RES. 92-380 - RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORI ZING THE EXECUTION OF A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE SAN BERNARDINO POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THE OFFICE OF TRAFFIC SAFETY OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ADDRESSING TRAFFIC SAFETY, DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE, AND THE USE OF SEAT BELTS AND CHILD RESTRAINT DEVICES IN AND ABOUT THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO. ( 17) RES. 92-381 - RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 92-276, ENTITLED IN PART "RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PRELIMINARILY DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE FORMATION OF A LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT LOCATED IN THE PEPPER AND RANDALL AREA" TO AMEND SECTION 1, SECTION 2 AND SECTION 4. (22) Council Member Maudsley made a motion, seconded by Council Member Minor, that said resolutions be adopted. Resolution Nos. 92-377, 92-378, 92-379, 92-380, and 92-381 were adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members Estrada, Reilly, Hernandez, Maudsley, Minor, Miller. Nays: None. Absent: Council Member Pope-Ludlam. COUNCIL MEMBER At 9 :55 a.m., Council meeting and POPE-LUDLAM RETURNED Council Member Pope-Ludlam returned took her place at the council table. to the RES. 92-382 - RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH EMERGENCY CARE INFORMATION CENTER RELATING TO AMBULANCE SERVICES STUDY. (12) Concern was expressed whether conducting this study would have an impact on the pending lawsuit ambulance services. feasibility relating to Shauna Clark, City Administrator, stated that when the concept of the feasibility study was presented, the pending lawsuit was discussed, and it was felt that if the City was successful in the trial that this feasibility study would position the City to be prepared to implement a city-operated emergency ambulance transport service. City Attorney Penman stated that no date has been set for the ambulance services trial. Council Member Hernandez made a motion, seconded by Council Member Estrada, that said resolution be adopted. 6 9/21/92 Resolution No. 92-382 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members Estrada, Reilly, Hernandez, Maudsley, Minor, Pope-Ludlam, Miller. Nays: None. Absent: None. COUNCIL ~EMBER paPE-LUDL~~ EXCUSED At 10:02 a.m., Council Member Pope-Ludlam left the Council meeting. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE MANAGER OF FACILITIES MANAGEMENT TO RECO~..MEND TO THE SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL COURT INCREASES IN THE BAIL FORFEITURE PENALTIES FOR CERTAIN PARKING VIOLATIONS LISTED IN THE MUNICIPAL CODE. (13) City Administrator Clark answered questions regarding the uniform bail schedule. Council Member Estrada made a motion, seconded by Council Member Reilly, and unanimously carried, that the resolution authorizing the Manager of Facilities Management to recommend to the San Bernardino Municipal Court increases in the bail forfeiture penalties for certain parking violations, be continued to later in the meeting so that the Director of Facilities Management could be present to answer questions. (See Page 28) COUNCIL MEMBER POPE-LUDLAM RETURNED At 10:06 a.m., Council Member pope-Ludlam returned to the Council meeting and took her place at the council table. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 3985 ENTITLED, IN PART, "A RESOLUTION . . . PROHIBI~ING PARKING UPON CERTAIN DESIGNATED STREETS OR PORTIONS THEREOF. . ," TO REMOVE THE NO PARKING ZONE ON SIERRA WAY, BETWEEN BASE LINE STREET AND HIGHLAND AVENUE, BETWEEN THE HOURS OF SEVEN A.M. AND NINE A.M., APPLICABLE TO THE WEST SIDE ONLY, AND BETWEEN THE HOURS OF FOUR P.~. AND SIX P.~., APPLICABLE TO THE EAST SIDE ONLY. (18) Concern was expressed regarding the potential for vehicle collisions on Sierra Way. James Wirth, 1980 N. Sierra Way, San Bernardino, CA, spoke in opposition to the newly installed left turn lane, and the elimination of the no parking zones on Sierra Way between Base Line and Highland Avenue. He urged the Council to refer the proposed changes to the Traffic Safety Committee for further review. Council Member Reilly made Member Minor, and unanimously removing the no parking zone on a motion, seconded by Council carried, that the resolution Sierra Way, between Base Line 7 9/21/92 Street and Highland Avenue, be referred to the Traffic Safety Committee for furt~er review. COUNCIL ~EMBER POPE-LUDLAM EXCUSED At 10:20 a.m., Council Member Pope-Ludlam left the Council meeting. RES. 92-383 - RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AWARDING A CONTRACT TO L & R ELECTRIC FOR ELECTRICAL SERVICE CONVERSION FROM OVERHEAD TO UNDERGROUND. (19) Council ~ember Estrada made a motion, seconded by Council Member Reilly, that said resolution be adopted. Resolution Ayes: Council Minor, Miller. Ludlam. No. 92-383 was adopted by the following vote: Members Estrada, Reilly, Hernandez, Maudsley, Nays: None. Absent: Council Member Pope- COUNCIL MEMBER POPE-LUDLA.Y. RETURNED Council Member Pope-Ludlam returned to the Council meeting and took her place at the council table. RES. 92-384 - RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITE GARY BRAUER RELATING TO THE PROVISION OF CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION SERVICES FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THREE FEDERAL-AID URBAN TRAFFIC SIGNAL INTERCONNECT PROJECTS. (20) Roger Hardgrave, Director explained the bid/request for Public Works. of Public proposal Works/City Engineer, process utilized by Council Member Hernandez made a motion, seconded by Council Member Estrada, t~at said resolution be adopted. Resolution No. 92-384 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members Estrada, Reilly, Hernandez, Maudsley, Minor, Pope-Ludlam, Miller. Nays: None. Absent: None. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF PICO AVENUE BETWEEN 5TH STREET AND SPRUCE STREET, AND RESERVING AN EASEMENT FOR SANITARY SEWER AND APPURTENANT FACILITIES AND AN EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES THEREIN. (2l) Concern was expressed regarding the ability to effectively police the area if to 5th Street from Pico Avenue. Police Department's access is eliminated 8 9/21/92 Council Member Estrada made a motion, seconded by Council Member Miller, that the resolut:.on declaring the intention to order the vacation of a portion of Pico Avenue, between 5th Street and Spruce Street, be continued to later in the meeting, so that the Police Department call commEmt em the potentidl impact of the street vacation. (Note: There was no vote taken at this time.) (See Page 28) IRVINGTON & MAGNOLIA ACQUISITION ASSESSMEKT DISTRICT NO. 1008 - AUTHORIZATION TO ESTABLISH - CONTINUED FROM SEPTEMBER 8, 1992 (23) This is the time and place continued to for discussion relative to establishing the Irvington and Magnolia Acquisition Assessment District No. 1008. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO MAKING APPOINTMENTS AND APPROVING VARIOUS AGREEMENTS IN IRVINGTON AND ~illGNOLIA ACQUISITION ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 1008. (Continued from September 8, 1992) (23) RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO FINDINGS ON PETITION FOR IRVINGTON AND ACQUISITION ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 1008. from September 8, 1992) MAKING MAGNOLIA (Continued (23) Council Member Member Miller, and and the formation Assessment District Maudsley made a motion, seconded by Council unanimously carried, that said resolutions, of the Irvington and Magnolia Acquisition No. 1008, be tabled. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ADDING SECTION 5.04.623 TO THE SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO BUSINESS REGISTRATION CERTIFICATES FOR BUSINESSES SELLING SPRAY PAINT AND WIDE-TIP MARKERS. (Continued from September 8, 1992) First (24) Shauna Clark, City Administrator, explained that in a recent survey of surrounding cities there had been very little interest in imposing this type of tax. Mayor Holcomb spoke in support of the enabling ordinance that would allow the Council to impose a surcharge on business registration certificates for businesses selling spray paint and marker pens. He stated that because the spray paint industry reaps a profit from the sale of spray paint, that the industry should pay for a portion of the damage that spray paint causes, in the same manner that the federal government imposes surcharges on alcohol and firearms. He explained that graffiti abatement currently costs the City approximately $100,000 annually. He stated that graffiti is one reason that many families leave cities, and makes it very difficult to attract new businesses to 9 9/21/92 cities. He felt that the City should be bold and innovative in attempting to solve the problems created by graffiti. Discussion ensued regarding the City's current graffiti abatement efforts. City Attorney Penman stated that the question would arise as to whether government's need to impose this fee outweighs the rights of the manufacturing company or seller. He felt that the ordinance may be deemed to be intrusive and therefore be illegal. He stated that the manufacturers could defeat such an ordinance by presenting evidence that only a small percentage of the total number of spray paint cans sold are used for graffiti. Concern was expressed regarding the need to impose an additional regulation on businesses during tough economic times. Discussion ensued regarding other sources of funding that may be available for graffiti abatement. Council Member Hernandez made a motion, seconded by Council Member pope-Ludlam, that said ordinance relating to Business Registration Certificates for businesses selling spray paint and wide tip markers, be tabled. The motion failed by the Members Hernandez, Pope-Ludlam. Reilly, Maudsley, Minor, Miller. following vote: Nays: Council Absent: None. Ayes: Council Members Estrada, Council Member Estrada made a motion, seconded by Council Member Minor, that said ordinance be laid over for final adoption. (Note: There was no vote taken at this time.) A impact having discussion was held that imposing such a to collect this tax. regarding the potential negative surcharge would have on retailers Discussion ensued regarding the need for a more comprehensive graffiti abatement program that would incorporate such issues as community education, sufficient manpower to implement abatement efforts on a day-to-day basis, and out of town landlords that allow graffiti and other nuisances to continue unimpeded. The motion failed by the following vote: Members Reilly, Maudsley, Minor. Nays: Council Hernandez, pope-Ludlam, Miller. Absent: None. Ayes: Council Members Estrada, Council Member Estrada made a motion, seconded by Council Member pope-Ludlam, that the ordinance relating to Business Registration Certificates for busi~esses selling spray paint and wide tip markers, be continued for thirty days to October 19, - 10 9/21/92 1992, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California, to allow the City Administrator time to deve~op a more comprehensive program for graffiti abatement. The motion carried by the following vote: Members Estrada, Reilly, Pope-Ludlam, Miller. Member Hernandez, ~audsley, ~inor. ~ays: None. Ayes: Nays: Council Council RECESS MEETING At 10:59 a.m., Mayor Holcomb declared a five-minute recess. RECONVENE MEETING At 11:07 a.m., the regular meeting of the Mayor and Common Council reconvened in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. ROLL CALL Roll call was taken by Deputy City Clerk Vale with the following being present: Mayor Holcomb; Council Members Estrada, Reilly, Hernandez, Y.audsley, Minor, Pope-Ludlam, Miller; Senior Assistant City Attorney Barlow, Deputy C~ty Clerk Vale. Absent: City Administrator Shauna Clark. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CO~~~ISSION - REGULAR MEETING At 11:07 a.,r.., Chairman Holcomb called the regular meeting of the Community Development Commission to order in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. RES. 92-385 - RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AWARDING A CONTRACT TO CHABOT PAINTING FOR EXTERIOR AND INTERIOR PAINT~NG OF VARIOUS CITY BUILDINGS. (R-5) Council Member !1inor made a motion, seconded by Council Member Estrada, that said resolution be adopted. Resolution No. 92-385 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members Estrada, Reilly, Hernandez, Maudsley, Minor, Pope-Ludlam, Miller. Nays: None. Absent: None. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION - REGULAR MEETING At this time, the Mayor and Common Council, acting as the Community Development Commission, took action on Community Development Commission items. There was no further action taken on Mayor and Common Council items during this portion of the meeting. RECESS MEETING At 12:10 p.m., the regular meeting of the Mayor and Common Council recessed to a luncheon workshop in the Management Information Center, !1IC Room, Sixth Floor, City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, City Hall, San Bernardino, California, to discuss the 11 9/21/92 issue of private refuse haulers. RECONVENE MEETING - LUNCHEON WORKSHOP - PRIVATE REFUSE F~ULERS (27) At 12:37 p.m., the regular meeting of the Mayor and Common Council reconvened in the Management Information Center, MIC Room, Sixth Floor, City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California, to discuss ~he issue of private refuse haulers. ROLL CALL Roll call was taken by Deputy City Clerk Vale with the following being present: Mayor Holcomb; Council Members Estrada, Reilly, Hernandez, Maudsley, Minor, Pope-Ludlam, Miller; City Attorney Penman, Deputy City Clerk Vale, City Administrator Shauna Clark. Absent: None. Also present were: Fred Wilson, Assistant City Administrator; Manuel Moreno, ~r., Director of Public Services; Senior Assistant City Attorney Barlow; and Tim Steinhaus, Agency Administrator, Economic Development Agency. LUNCHEON WORKSHOP - PRIVATE REFUSE HAULERS (27) In d. rnemoranJ.um dated September 10, 1992, Shauna Clark, City Administrator, stated that over the last year, staff has discussed the dilemma the City faces in dealing with private refuse haulers. With the advent of Assembly Bill (AB) 939 recycling mandates and penalties, comprehensive solid waste management planning is imperative. Failure to meet AB 939 requirements through controlling and reporting adequate waste diversion could result in a $10,000 per day fine. The Health and Safety Code allows private refuse haulers to continue servicing their accounts for five years after territory has been annexed into the City. The Municipal Code has extended that five year grace period, by another five years, for private refuse haulers who obtain permits from the City. The private refuse haulers who have permits to operate in the City are: Jack's Disposal, Cal Disposal, Curran's Disposal, and BFI. These four private refuse haulers service approximately 681 commercial and residential accounts. It is estimated by the Department of Public Services that these accounts generate approximately $1 million in annual revenue for the private refuse haulers. San Bernardino has not aggressively enforced its code in relation to private refuse haulers. Some feel that as the City has not pursued enforcement, the private refuse haulers have a vested right to the accounts they have been servicing. Some feel that the City should now decide either to enforce the code, or allow the private refuse haulers to operate with attainable 12 9/21/92 reporting requirements. Staff has prepared five alternatives for review: aggressive enforcement; negotiate boundary trade; negotiate a business trade; ~emain status quo; or buyout illegal accounts from private refuse ~aulers. Shauna Clark, Ci~y Administrator, requested that the Council give staff general poli.cy direction so that staff can further investigate the available alternatives, and the positive and negative aspects of each alternative. City Attorney Penman explained that the private refuse haulers do not have vested ownership rights and are in violation of the law by engaging in an unfair business practice under the Business and Professional Code. Manuel Moreno, Jr., Di.rector of Public Services, explained how the City arrived at its current situation. He stated that approximately 12 to 14 years ago, when the Ci ty started to aggressively annex areas, the pri.vate refuse haulers were permitted by law to continue refuse collection in the newly annexed areas for five years. Subsequently, the private refuse haulers negotiated with ~he City for a one-time five year extension of those rights. He explained that the law applies only to developed commercial and residential annexations, and that if an area was vacant land when it was annexed 1:hen thE< private haulers would have no right to refuse collection rights. Mr. Moreno stated as part of AB 939 the City will be required to provide recycling and waste reduction programs for residential and commercial businesses ~n order to meet the requirement to reduce waste by 25% by 1995, and 50% by the year 2000. The City should investigate the possibility of its own Materials Recovery Faci.lity (MRF), in which to separate and sort refuse for recyclables. At this time the only marketable recyclable commodity is aluminum, which means that the only way for the City to break even on the costs for complying with AB 939 would be to have a MRF so that it would reduce the cost for tipping fees. City Administrator Clark recommended that the item be continued, to allow staff to research and provide additional information to the Counci.l prior to a decision being made. Discussion ensued regarding service to additional commercial would face increased liability commercial accounts were serviced. whether the City could provide accounts; and whether the City exposure and costs if more COUNCIL MEMBERS MILLER, POPE-LUDLAM & ESTRADA EXCUSED At 1:26 p.m., Council Members Miller, pope-Ludlam, and Estrada left the Counci.lmeeting. 13 9/21/92 It was the consensus of the Council that the discussion relative to the issue of private refuse haulers be continued, and that the City Administrator be directed to compile additional information regarding the issue. RECESS MEETING At 1: 26 p. m., the luncheon workshop recessed the regular meeting of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California, to conduct a tour of the Platt Building. ROLL CALL Roll was taken by Deputy City Clerk Vale with the following being present: Mayor Holcomb; Council Members Reilly, Hernandez, Maudsley, Minor; Senior Assistant City Attorney Barlow, Deputy City Clerk Vale. Absent: Council Members Estrada, Pope-Ludlam, Miller; City Administrator Shauna Clark. Also present: Manuel Moreno, Jr., Services; and Jim Sharp, Project Manager, Agency/Development Department. Director Economic of Public Development PLATT BUILDING TOUR (30) Jim Sharp, Project Manager, Economic Development Agency /Development Department, conducted a tour of the Crest Theater, and adjacent office space located in the Platt Building. Mr. Sharp pointed out both the positive unique characteristics of the structure, and the negative structure defects and hazards of the structure. RECONVENE MEETING At 2: 10 p. m., Mayor Holcomb called the regular meeting of the Mayor and Common Council to order in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San 3ernardino, California. ROLL CALL Roll call was taken by Deputy City Clerk Vale with the following being present: Mayor Holcomb; Council Members Estrada, Reilly, Hernandez, Maudsley, Minor, Miller; Senior Assistant City Attorney Barlow, Deputy City Clerk Vale. Absent: Council Member Pope-Ludlam; City Administrator Shauna Clark. AVIATION REPAIR PROGRAM - NORTON AIR FORCE BASE RE-USE (NB-I) Council Member Hernandez made a motion, seconded by Council Member Minor, and unanimously carried, that the issue of the Aviation Repair Program at Norton Air Force Base arose subsequent to the posting of the agenda. 14 9/21/92 In a memorandum dated September 21, 1992, Council Member Hernandez, stated that a company from Texas would like to establish an aircraft mechanics school at Norton Air Force Base. On the surface this appears to be good for Norton development because there would be another tenant paying rent; however, in the long term this could work against local interests and economic vitality, because San Bernardino Valley College also has an aircraft mechanics program and desires to relocate its program to Norton so that it could be expanded, which is an opportunity that the City should not overlook. This company from Texas would charge local residents more than ten times the tuition fees than what Valley College would charge for the courses; and would take its profits from the program out of State. A key foundation to the economic revitalization of this area will be the close working relationship between local industry and local universities and colleges. The City has an opportunity at this time to develop these working relationships with local industries and educational institutions. The City should strive to create an environment where our educational institutions are an integral part of the economic development effort. Discussion ensued regarding a recent article in The Sun regarding the proposed re-use of the airport at Norton Air Force Base property after the military departs in 1993/1994. It was clarified that this item has never been formally addressed by the San Bernardino International Airport Authority, and several Council Members urged caution in taking any action today. COUNCIL MEMBER At 2:13 p.m., Council meeting and POPE-LUDLAM RETURNED Council Member pope-Ludlam returned took her place at the council table. to the Dr. Singer, San Bernardino Community College District, stated that Valley College has had an active airplant and power frame program in San Bernardino for fifty years, and the location at Norton for forty years. He urged the Council to express its support to the Airport Authority for Valley College's expansion of the program at Norton. He felt that the Airport Authority'S bottom line should not be strictly how much rent can be generated, but what is best for the citizens and the community. Valley College could offer such a program to residents more economically than an out-of-state school by charging approximately $1,000 for the same program that the out-of-state school would charge approximately $12,000. He stated that Valley College could be a long term tenant at Norton whereas the out-of- state school could not guarantee that it would stay long term. Mayor Holcomb explained that as this issue would be decided by the San Bernardino International Airport Authority, the Mayor l5 9/21/92 and Council could only express an opinion on the matter. He requested that a motion be made that priority should not be given to the highest amount of rent that can be generated, but to which program would open up educational opportunities to the citizens of this community, and ensure an adequate labor supply for the firms which will be locating out at Norton. Council Members Estrada, Reilly and ~iller stated that they would abstain from the vote until more specific information relative to the two programs could be obtained from the Airport Authority. Council Member Hernandez made a motion, seconded by Council Member Maudsley, to direct the Airport Authority that priority should not be given to the amount of rent paid, but which program could do the best job on a cost efficient basis that would provide educational opportunities to the citizens of this area; and that the highest priori~y should be given to the San Bernardino Community College. The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: Members Hernandez, Maudsley, Minor, pope-Ludlam. Nays: Abstain: Council Members Estrada, Reilly, Miller. None. Council None. Absent: It was the consensus of the Council that the San Bernardino International Airport Authority should review both programs and provide more specific information on the two programs to the Council. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION - REGULAR MEETING At 2:28 p.m., Chairman Holcomb called the regular meeting of the Community Development Commission to order in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. At this time, the Mayor and Common Council, acting as the Community Development Commission, took action on Community Development Commission items. There was no action taken on Mayor and Common Council items during this portion of the meeting. COUNCIL MEMBER POPE-LUDLAM EXCUSED Council Member Pope-Ludlam left the Council meeting. DEPUTY CITY CLERK MEDINA ARRIVED At 3:l7 p.m., Deputy City Clerk Council meeting and assumed the duties of Medina arrived City Clerk. at the POLICE FACILITY RENOVATION 701 NORTH "E" STREET (5-3 & R-9) In a memorandum dated September 15, 1992, Roger Hardgrave, 16 9/21/92 Director of Public Works/City Engineer, stated that the architect renovating the new Police Facility, located at 701 North "E" Street, has been meeting regularly with the Design Development Team. At the Design Development Team meeting on September 9, 1992, the architect distri~uted schematic cost estimates. Five alternates were presented in the schemat~c estimate, ranging from $2,106,104 to $6,586,171. Alternate A, the lowest priced alternate, includes the renovation of the office spaces and restrooms, with no costs included for structural upgrading to meet current earthquake criteria. Alternate B, in the amount of $3,629,309 includes the renovation in Alternate A, plus $1,523,205 for structural upgrade. Alternate C, includes the addition of 3,748 square feet to the lobby and mezzanine floors in Building A, electrica: and mechanical upgrades, the addition of two elevators, and site work estimated at $5,008,369. Alternate D, is the same as Alternate C except that a 8,083 square foot addition is included to bring the total available space up to the programmed value, with the cost estimated at $5,816,669. The architect reviewed the site to determine the potential for future expansion, and a footprint for a 13,000 square foot addition to Building A has been developed. This footprint would accommodate a three or four story building to be constructed, and fits in well with the site conditions and Building A. Alternate E, was developed, due to the cost associated with renovating Building B, as a comparison of the cost of this renovation with construction of the new addition to Building A. The cost for Alternate E is $6,586,171, which is $1,577,802 higher than Alternate C, and $769,502 higher than Alternate D. Building B presented some operational problems for the Police Department, due to it being separated from Building A. An amount of $1,523,205 is included in the alternates, except for Alternate A, for structural upgrading to meet current earthquake requirements. This amount is very preliminary, and would probably change sig:'lificantly. Any change in the cost for structural upgrading for Building B would affect the difference in costs, between renovation and construction of an addition to Building A. The Structural Engineer indicated that more precise estimates would be available for the :'lext meeting with the Design Development Team on September 30, 1992. It should be emphasized that the schematic cost estimates are a first draft, and are subject to extensive revision. Council Member Hernandez made a motion, seconded by Council Member Reilly, and unanimously carried, that the discussion and possible action relative to the renovation of the new Police Facility located at 701 North "E" Street, be continued to October 17 9 /21/92 5, 1992, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. COUNCIL MEMBER At 3:21 p.m., Council meeting and POPE-LUDLAM RETURNED Council Member Pope-Ludlam :r.eLurneci took her place at the council table. to the APPEAL - DENIAL - VARIANCE NO. 92-10 - TO CONSTRUCT A 95-FOOT TALL FREEWAY ORIENTED SIGN TO IDENTIFY SEVEN TENANTS CENTER IDENTIFICATION MONUMENT TO IDENTIFY SIX TENANTS - CONTINUED FROM SEPTEMBER 8, 1992 (28) This is the time and place continued to for an appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of Variance No. 92-10, requesting approval of a variance to construct a 95-foot tall freeway oriented sign identifying seven tenants, and a center identification monument that identifies six tenants. In a memorandum dated September 15, 1992, Al Boughey, Director of Planning and Building Services, stated that on September 8, 1992, the Mayor and Council continued Variance No. 92-10 for two weeks, and referred it back to staff to develop Conditions of Approval and positive Findings of Fact; and to reconsider the request subject to the following: that the freeway sign may not exceed 85 feet in height; that the :CL'ee'~~y sign may have 125 square feet of sign area per face; that the poles shall be architecturally treated; that the signage shall consist of channel letters or logos; and up to five highway uses may be identified on the sign. In order to make positive findings, the approved sign must be consistent with General Plan Policy No. 1.45.6, which prohibits pole signs in the State University area. To ensure General Plan consistency, staff has proposed conditions of approval to require architectural enhancements to conceal the structural steel supports of the sign. Conceptual elevations illustrating possible design treatments will be presented for the Council's consideration. Mayor Holcomb opened the hearing. Al Boughey, Director of Planning and Building Services, stated that in addition to architecturally treating the pole, it is proposed that oleanders, or the equivalent, be planted at the base of the sign. Deputy City Attorney Empeno stated that neither the General Plan or the Developmen~ Code contain a definition of pole sign, therefore, any decision made regarding pole signs is at the discretion of the Council. 18 9/21/92 Council Member Estrada made a motion, seconded by Council Member Minor, and unanimously carried, that the hearing be closed; and that Variance No. 92-10 be approved, as modified, based on the findings of fact (Exhibi t 1) and subject to the conditions of approval (Exhibit 2), with the following modifications: that there are special circumstances that would warrant an increase in sign area; that the sign area may be increased to 200 square feet per face to compensate for the increase in height; and with the related condition that the oleanders around the base of the sign shall be irrigated, and shall be included in the landscape irrigation plan. COUNCIL MEMBERS ESTRADA, REILLY & MILLER EXCUSED At 3:26 p.m., Council Members Estrada, Reilly and Miller left the Council meeting. PASEO LAS PLACITAS SPECIFIC PLAN AREA - PERMITTED USES IN EXISTING STRUCTURES (29) In a memorandum dated September 10, 1992, Al Boughey, Director of Planning and Building Services, stated that when the Paseo Las Placitas Specific Plan was adopted, several areas were identified for construction of large structures such as parking structures, theaters, and rnercados (markets). Those sites are currently improved with existing buildings, some which are occupied, and some which are vacant. There have been requests for businesses to occupy some of the buildings; however, there is no provision in the Specific Plan which addresses the re-use of existing buildings. Staff recommends that the Mayor and Council direct Planning staff to prepare an amendment to the Paseo Las Placitas Specific Plan, and a Development Code Amendment to expand the permitted uses allowed in existing buildings with the specific plan area. Council Member Minor made a motion, seconded by Council Member Hernandez, and unanimously carried, that the review of the list of permitted uses in existing structures located within the Paseo Las Placitas Specific Plan area, be continued to October 5, 1992, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. RECESS MEETING At 3:29 p.m., Y.ayor Holcomb declared a five-minute recess. RECONVENE MEETING At 3:37 p.m., the regular meeting of the Mayor and Common Council reconvened in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. ROLL CALL Roll call was taken by Deputy City Clerk Medina with the following being present: Mayor Holcomb; Council Members Estrada, 19 9/21/92 Reilly, Hernandez, Maudsley, Minor, Pope-Ludlam; Deputy City Attorney Empeno, Deputy City Clerk Medina. Absent: Council Member Miller; City Administrator Shauna Clark. APPEAL - DEMOLITION PROl'OSAL REV lEW (DPR) NO. PLATT BUILDING 90-02- (30) This Economic Council Force to is the time and place set to hear an appeal by the Development Agency in requesting that the Mayor and uphold the decision of the Historic Preservation Task approve the proposal to demolish the Platt Building. In a memorandum dated September 10, 1992, Al Boughey, Director of Planning and Building Services, stated that on June 18, 1992, the Historic Preservation Task Force adopted the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approved the proposed demolition of the Platt Building. That decision was appealed to the Planning Commission on August 4, 1992, by Dr. James Mulvihill and Council Member Maudsley. Based on public comment in opposition to the project, the Planning Commission upheld the request for an appeal and denied the approval of the project. On August 11, 1992, the Economic Development Agency submitted a letter appealing the Planning Commission's decision to uphold the appeal and deny th8 d~proval of the project. The Mayor and Council have three alternatives: to determine that the Platt Building is not a significant resource of the City and uphold the appeal, adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve the project; determine that the Platt Building is a significant resource of the City, deny the appeal and deny the project; or determine that the Platt Building is a significant resource of the City and require that an Environmental Impact Report be prepared to evaluate any environmental impacts resulting from the loss of the resource, and to identify alternatives to the demolition project and the feasibility of such alternatives. Mayor Holcomb opened the hearing. Mayor Holcomb stated that the building is not economically viable, and stated his support for the demolition of the Platt Building. He felt that the cost to bring the building into conformance with Building Codes would be exorbitant, and that it would be cheaper to demolish the present structure and replicate the architectural amenities in a new building. He stated that the building costs the City approximately $10,000 annually to maintain it in its present boarded up state. COUNCIL MEMBER MILLER RETURNED At 3:40 p.m., Council Member ~iller meeting and took her place at the council returned to the Council table. 20 9/21/92 James Sharp, Project Manager, Economic Development Agency/Development Department, stated that although the Platt Building is a unique building there are several significant issues that would have to be remedied in order for it to be occupied again, such as: seismic upgrading to comply with State codes; asbestos abatement; a wooden floor in the theater that is a fire hazard for a public building; and the elevator does not comply with Building Codes, or the American Disabilities Act. He stated that it would be extremely difficult and expensive to rehabilitate the facility for occupancy. COUNCIL MEMBER MINOR EXCUSED At 4:10 p.m., Council Member Minor left the Council meeting. James Wirth, 1980 North Sierra Way, San Bernardino, CA, spoke in opposition to the proposed demolition of the Platt Building. He felt that the building was historically significant to the City and should be rehabilitated. He stated his support for the concept of the I~~X Theater and Science and Technology Museum for children. He felt that the Platt Building provided the greatest potential for downtown revitalization than any other project currently proposed. Jim Mulvihill, 5500 University Parkway, San Bernardino, CA, stated that he is a Professor at California State University, a specialist in Urban Planning, and a certified planner. He spoke in opposition to the proposed demolition of the Platt Building, and urged the Council to deny the demolition permit so that the proposed alternative uses for the facility can be pursued. Biron Bauer, 765 North Mountain View Avenue, San Bernardino, CA, spoke in opposition to the proposed demolition of the Platt Building. He felt that although historic preservation was not an easy task, that the rewards outweighed the costs involved. Mary Jane Wilson, a resident of San opposition to the proposed demolition of felt that the Platt Building was a building and should be preserved. Bernardino, CA, spoke in the Platt Building. She significantly historic Rod MacDonald, Vice President and Director of Construction, Rancon, Tri-City Corporate Center, 650 East Hospitality Lane, Suite #600, San Bernardino, CA, spoke in support of proposed demoli tion of the Platt Building. He stated that although the demolition of the Platt Building was not a part of Phase I of the Rancon superblock, demolition of the Platt Building was included in the Master Plan for the superblock project. The superblock Master Plan did not contemplate preserving the Platt Building, and proposes a residential high rise building for that location that would include shops on the ground floor. He felt that the Platt Building was not reusable due to the hybrid floor plan, and that the Council should make a positive statement and vote to 21 9/21/92 demolish the building as a first step in revitalizing downtown, and moving the superblock project forward. Gil Lara, 3731 East Lynwood, San Bernardino, CA, spoke in support of the proposed demolition of the platt Building, all":;' felt that the building could not be made economically viable without extensive government funding. Tim Steinhaus, Agency Administrator, Economic Development Agency, stated that he had recently visited an IMAX theater in Denver, Colorado, t~at is housed in a rehabilitated older building. He toured the building to see whether an I~~X theater use was a compatible use with the Crest Theater located in the Platt Building. DEPUTY CITY CLERK VALE RETURNED At 4:53 p.m., Deputy City Clerk Vale returned to the Council meeting and assumed the duties of City Clerk. Mr. Steinhaus stated that in Denver the I~~X theater clients are primarily school age children on field trips to the Museum adjacent to the theater, and that once they have completed visiting the Museum they go to see the I~~X movie. He did not feel that the Crest Theater had sufficient space for an lMAX theater movie screen. He explained that many more tourists visit Denver than San Bernardino. Discussion ensued regarding rehabilitating the Crest Theater, which Building, for an IMAX theater. the possibility of is located in the Platt Council Member Reilly made a motion, seconded by Council Member Maudsley, that the appeal of the Planning Commission's action regarding Demolition Proposal Review No. 90-02, demolition of the Platt Building, be continued to October 5, 1992; so that positive approaches can be developed, and that no action shoulQ be taken on the demolition application for sixty or ninety days so that advertisements can be placed in the Wall Street Journal and other national publications stating that the Platt Building is available for renovation and rehabilitation and requesting viable bid proposals on the building, and that no developer shall have an exclusive right to negotiate in the first round of negotiations. Mayor Holcomb expressed concern that it would require approximately $4 million in government subsidies to rehabilitate the Platt Building, and that there was not adequate parking in that general area for a theater. The motion failed by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members Reilly, Maudsley. Nays: Council Members Estrada, Hernandez, Pope-Ludlam, ~iller. Absent: Council Member Minor. 22 9/21/92 Discussion ensued regarding the three alternatives proposed by the Planning staff, and the potential positive and negative ramifications of each. Council Member Estrada made a substitute motion, seconded by Council Member Mil~er, to deny the appeal, and deny the project. Discussion continued regarding the three alternatives available to the Council; and what procedures would be required if a developer desired to rehabil:.tate the structure if the appeal is denied. The motion carr:.ed by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members Estrada, Hernandez, Maudsley, Pope-Ludlam, Miller. Nays: Council Member Reilly. Absent: Council Member Minor. MAYOR HOLCOMB EXCUSED Mayor Holcomb left the Council meeting, and the duties of Mayor Pro Tem were assumed by Council Member Pope-Ludlam. CLOSED SESSION Council Member Estrada made a :notion, seconded by Council Member Pope-Ludlam, and unanimously carried, that henceforth all closed sessions shall be conducted at 8:30 a.m. on council mee~ing dates, except closed sessions that are specifically continued to a different time. DEPUTY CITY CLERK MEDINA RETURNED Deputy City Clerk Medina returned to the Council meeting and assumed the duties of City Clerk. RES. 92-386 - RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 655 ENTITLED, IN PART, "A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CERTAIN STREETS OR PORTIONS THEREOF AS THROUGH HIGHWAYS...;" AND PROVIDING TH..l\T EUCALYPTUS AVENUE IS A THROUGH HIGHWAY AT ITS INTERSECTION WITH MILL STREET. (5-1) Council Member Hernandez made a motion, seconded by Council Member Estrada, that said resolution be adopted. Resolution No. 92-386 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members Estrada, Reilly, Hernandez, Maudsley, pope-Ludlam, Mil~er. Nays: None. Absent: Counc il Member Minor. RES. 92-387 - RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AWARDING A CONTRACT TO BOB BRITTON, INC. FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A BOX CULVERT ON LITTLE LEAGUE DRIVE, AT CABLE CREEK CHANNEL. (5-2) 23 9/21/92 Council Member Mil.l.er made a motion, seconded by Council Member Hernandez, that said resolution be adopted. Resolution No. 92-387 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members Estrada, Reilly, Hernandez, Maudsley, Pope-Ludlam, Miller. Nays: None. Absent: Council Member Minor. GRAND JURY AUDIT - CITY ATTORNEY PENMAN (25) In a memorandum dated September 14, 1992, James Penman, City Attorney, sought authorization to request that the Grand Jury conduct audits of the City Attorney's Office, the Executive Branch, and City Change Orders. Council Member Estrada made a motion, seconded by Council Member Miller, that the discussion and possible action regarding the Grand Jury Audit as requested by City Attorney James Penman, be continued to October 19, ::'992, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: Members Estrada, Reilly, Maudsley, Pope-Ludlam, Miller. Council Member Hernandez. Absent: Council Member Minor. Council Nays: MANAGEMENT/CONFIDENTIAL COMPENSATION - CITY MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION SAN BERNARDINO (26) In a memorandum dated September 15, 1992, Annie Ramos, Chairman, San Bernardino City Management Association Advisory Committee, stated that in May 1989, the Mayor and Council approved Resolution No. 89-129, approving a Management and Confidential Employee Compensation and Benefits Plan. Resolution No. 89-129 designated the following specific compensation levels and timelines for implementation: January 1, 1990 January 1, 1991 January 1, 1992 January 1, 1993 4.9% Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) 4.3% COLA and Benefits Survey 3.6% COLA and Salary Survey 2.9% COLA and Benefits Survey In 1990, with the realization that the City was experiencing financial difficulties, the San Bernardino City Management Association voted to voluntarily forego its approved increases in the interest of the City. Consequently, the Management and Confidential employees have not received a salary adjustment since 1989. By foregoing these approved increases, the City has saved over $1.1 million; however, all other employee units have continued to receive approved salary increases, costing the City $5.6 million. A balanced b~dget was adopted by Council on June 24, 1992. 24 9/21/92 A number of events have occurred since that time that present a much better revenue picture than previously anticipated. First, a pending Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) lawsuit was decided in favor of the City and State. The Mayor and Council took action on June 24, 1992 to transfer the balance of the PERS refund of $4.5 million to the Liability Fund. This action should fund almost all contingent liabilities, based on the Fiscal Year 1990/91 Annual Financial Report. Second, a recently completed financial audit of the City's liability fund has identified $1.3 million in uncollected insurance payments. Risk Management is currently negotiating for collection of these payments. Third, the State budget was finally adopted and Finance has done an analysis of its impact on the City. The City Fiscal Year 1992/93 budget assumed a $1,067,000 loss in property tax revenues, and a $500,000 loss in motor vehicle in-lieu fees. It now seems evident that the property tax revenue loss will be $800,000. Motor vehicle in-lieu fees are still undecided. Assuming these preliminary figures from the State are accurate, and revenues and expenditures remain constant, the ending General Fund balance is estimated at $2,005,994 in reserve. The Management Association requested that given these revenue factors, that the Mayor and Council authorize full implementation of the salary survey as designated by Resolution No. 89-129. Comp Plus completed the survey for seventy-six management and confidential classes in November 1991. Based on this survey, compensation levels and salary ranges have been developed that are comparable to the average level for similar positions in like cities. Implementation of the survey for calendar year 1992 is $568,036, which includes both salary costs and variable benefits. It was the consensus of the Director prepare a report providing regarding the possible positive and raises could have on City finances. Council that the Finance more detailed information negative impact that the In a memorandum dated September 21, 1992, Fred Wilson, Acting Director of Finance, presented an overview of the City's fiscal condition, which. outlines the City's current status, as well as providing a brief historical perspective since 1988. By 1988, the City had accumulated an internal service fund deficit of approximately $13,100,000. According to the former Finance Director, the primary reason for the deficit was due to the fact that internal service fund charges assessed by the City to the operating departments were insufficient to cover internal service fund operations. This problem was recognized by the City Administrator and appropriate steps were taken to address this deficit. Beginning in fiscal year 1989/90, increased user charges were established and increased inter fund transfers from the general fund to the internal service funds were initiated to 25 9/21/92 begin to reduce the accumulated deficits. In fiscal year 1990/91, the imposition of booking fees, as well as the downturn in local economic conditions, compounded the problem of balancing the budget dnd reducing the internal serv~ce fund deficits. In November :991, the City reopened budget deliberations in an effort to balance the budget. After a series of budget hearings, the Mayor and Council approved a combination of budget cuts and new revenues which collectively saved approximately $2.4 million in the general fund. Twenty- seven positions were eliminated as part of the budget cuts. In spite of these actions, a continual decline in revenues resulted in the City's ending general fund balance for the fiscal year being ($600,000). However, the internal service fund cash balance deficits were reduced by an additional $1,400,000 based on the increased user charges. In January 1991, in response to a further weakening economy, the Mayor and Council approved a series of budget reduction measures in an effort to rebalance the fiscal year 1991/92 budget. It was estimated that, unless such measures were implemented, the City would end the fiscal year with general fund expenditures exceeding general fund revenues by approximately $6 million. In response to this anticipated shortfall, all departments decreased t.h<=~r existing budgets by five percent. These department reductions, along with a number of other budget reduction measures, totalling approximately $6 million were approved by the Mayor and Council in late January 1992, and eliminated a total of fifty-seven additional positions city- wide. In March 1992, the City Administrator presented a memorandum to the Mayor and Council outlining information for the fiscal year 1992/93 budget which included a preliminary analysis of general fund revenues and expenditures. Anticipating no real economic recovery, and assuming no chQnge in the terms of funding the departments, coupled with the mandatory set aside for 186 salaries, and accrued booking fees r it was estimated that a shortfall of approximately $2.9 million could be anticipated. A number of options were presented to the Mayor and Council in an effort to close the gap. The options which were ultimately approved, included an additional reduction in all department budgets of 2.7 percent, refinancing of City Hall, and reducing the appropriated reserve. These actions, coupled with other cutbacks and new revenues totalling $2.6 million, led to the adoption of a balanced budget for fiscal year 1992/93. The unknown factor at the time of budget adoption in June 1992 was the impact of the proposed cuts in the State budget. The City's adopted budget anticipated a loss of approximately $1,067,000 in property tax revenue, and a $500,000 loss in motor vehicle in-lieu fees. 26 9/21/92 With the adoption of the State budget, preliminary figures have been received relative to the impact of the State budget cuts on the City. As noted above, the budget adopted by the Mayor and Council in June 1992, assumed a $1,067,000 loss in property tax revenues and a $500,000 loss in motor vehicle iil- lieu fees. The actual information received from the League of California Cities indicated that the property tax revenue loss would be $761,500. Motor vehicle in-lieu fees were not impacted by the State action. Although final confirmation has not yet been received from the State relative to actual budget cuts, the City has developed a plan which details the general fund budget for fiscal year 1992/93. Assuming revenue and expenditure projections remain constant and no additional revenue cuts result from the State, the ending general fund balance is estimated at $2,050,809. The primary reason for the increase in the projected ending fund balance is due to slightly increased revenues in sales tax, utility tax and property tax. In addition, analysis of revenue projections through August 1992 indicates that overall development fees are down approximately $150,000 over last year at this time. However, sales tax revenues are up approximately $180,000 over last year at this time. Utility tax revenues, and the other major revenue categories are on target relative to budget through August 1992. This initial analysis indicates that any type of improvement in local economic conditions would enhance the City's revenue base for the balance of the fiscal year. Council took action on June 24, 1992, to transfer the balance of the PERS refund, estimated at approximately $4,578,000, to the liability fund. This action should fund almost all contingent liabilities which are based on the fiscal year 1990/91 annual financial report. As previously noted, one of the revenue enhancement proposals adopted by the Council in March 1992 was the refinancing of City Hall. The objective of the City Hall refinancing was to provide additional cash to replenish the internal service funds which were in cash overdraft positions. By March 1992, the City had reduced the internal service fund deficits to approximately $9.2 million, with the exception of the contingent liabilities in the worker's compensation fund, and the CATV fund which are currently operating with a fund deficit of approximately $380,000. The internal service fund deficits have been eliminated as a result of the City Hall refinance. It is important to note that approximately $6.5 million in one-time measures were utilized to balance this year's budget which represents nine percent of the total general fund budget. The use of one-time revenues is not a preferred budget balancing tool. However, the City for the first time in many years is projecting a healthy general fund ending balance and has eliminated the major internal service fund deficits. This is a significant improvement in the City's fiscal situation since 27 9/21/92 1988. Careful ensure that the future. management of resources will be necessary to positive fiscal condition will continue into the Council Member Estrada made a motion, secondea by counc1..L Member Pope-Ludlam, and unanimously carried, that the San Bernardino City Management Association, Management/Confidential compensation salary survey of November, 1991, be continued to September 29, 1992, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE MANAGER OF FACII..ITIES MANAGE:.!ENT TO RECOMMEND TO THE SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL COURT INCREASES IN THE BAIL FORFEITURE PENALTIES FOR CERTAIN PARKING VIOLATIONS LISTED IN THE MUNICIPAL CODE. (Discussed earlier in the meeting) (See page 7) (13) Council Member Maudsley made a motion, seconded by Council Member Estrada, and unanimously carried, that the resolution authorizing the Manager of Facilities :.!anagement to recommend to the San Bernardino Municipal Court increases in the bail forfei ture penal ties for certain parking violations, be continued to October 5, 1992, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. RES. 92-388 - RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF PICO AVENUE BETWEEN 5TH STREET AND SPRUCE STREET, AND RESERVING AN EASEMENT FOR SANITARY SEWER AND APPURTENANT FACILITIES AND AN EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES THEREIN. (Discussed earlier in the meeting) (See page 8) (21) City Administrator Clark stated that staff has contacted the Police Department regarding the City's intention to order the vacation of a po~tion of Pico Avenue, between 5th Street and Spruce Street; and inquired whether this street vacation would have a negative impact on the Police Department's abilities to police the area. The Police Department did not have objections to the proposed street vacation. Council Member Hernandez made a motion, seconded by Council Member Estrada, that said resolution be adopted. Resolution No. 92-388 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members Estrada, Reilly, Hernandez, Maudsley, Pope-Ludlam, Miller. Nays: None. Absent: Council Member Minor. 28 9/21/92 RECESS MEETING - CLOSED SESSION (1 & 5-4) At 5:48 p.m., the Kayor and Common Council and Community Development Commiss~on recessed to closed session for the following: a. based on existing facts and circumstances, set out below, the City Council is meeting only to decide whether a closed session is authorized pursuant to California Government Code Section 54956.9(b) (2) ; b. to give instruction to the City's/Commission's negotiator on the purchase of property pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8. The real property which the negotiations concern is generally located at: ; c. to consider personnel matters pursuant to Government Code Section 54957; d. to meet with designated representatives regarding labor relations matters pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6; e. to confer with the Chief of Police on matters posing a threat to the security of public buildings or a threat to the public's right of access to public services or public facilities pursuant to Government Code Section 54957; f. to confer with the attorney regarding pending Ii tigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b)(1), as there is significant exposure to litigation; g. to confer with the attorney regarding litigation pursuant to Government Code 54956.9(c), so that Council/Commission may whether to init~ate litigation; pending Section decide h. to meet with an appl~cant for a applicant's attorney pursuant Section 54956.7; City license and the to Government Code i. to confer with the attorney regarding pending litigation which has been initiated formally to which the City is a party to pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) as follows: Stubblefield Construction Companv. et al vs. City of San Bernardino. et al - San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. 242998; San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. 252058; 29 9/21/92 City of San Bernardino vs. Libertv Cable T.V.. et al- United States District Court Case No. 82-6876 WMB; City of San Bernardino vs. Countv of San Bernardino. et al- Riverside Superior Cour~ Case No. 20/900; Tomas Armendariz. et al vs. James F. Penman. et al. - United States District Court Case No. 9:-5757 CMB (JRx); Garcia vs. Citv of San Bernardino - San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. 249518; San Bernardino Police Officer's Association vs. Citv of San Bernardino (Bashaw) - San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. 239366; Tammv Murnhv vs. City of San Bernardino - San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. 254764; City of San Bernardino vs. Bert Bussell. et al San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. 271568; Petrillo vs. Citv of San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. 255735; San Bernardino Guardian Bank vs. James F. Penman. et al - United States District Court - Case No. 92-4415 (Ex); Guardian Bank vs. James F. Penman. et al - San Bernardino County Superior Court Case No. 272631; Weslev vs. Citv of San Bernardino - San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. 265422; Lines vs. City of San Bernardino - San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. 221289; Citv vs. Chambers Cable - San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. 264793. Council Member Estrada made a motion, seconded by Council Member Miller, and unanimously carried, that all closed session items not taken up in closed session today would be continued to the Mayor and Common Counc il meeting scheduled for 9: 00 a. m. , Tuesday, September 29, 1992, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, CA. CLOSED SESSION At 5:48 p.m., Mayor Pro Tern pope-Ludlam called the closed session to order in the conference room of the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. 30 9/21/92 ROLL CALL Roll call was taken by Deputy City Clerk Medina with the following being present: ~ayor Pro Tem Pope-Ludlam; Council Members Estrada, Rei:ly, Hernandez, Maudsley, Pope-Ludlam, Miller; City Attorney Penman, Deputy City CLerk Medina, City Administrator Shauna Clark. Absent: Mayor Holcomb; Council Member Minor. ADJOURN CLOSED SESSION At 6: 15 p.m., the closed session adjourned to the regular meeting of the Mayor and Comrnon Council of the City of San Bernardino. RECONVENE MEETING At 6:15 p.m., Mayor Pro Tem Pope-Ludlam reconvened the regular meeting of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. ROLL CALL Roll call was taken by Deputy City Clerk Medina with the following being present: Mayor Pro Tem pope-Ludlam; Council Members Estrada, Reilly, Hernandez, Mauds1ey, Pope-Ludlam, Miller; City Attorney Penman, Deputy City Clerk Medina, City Administrator Shauna Clark. Absent: Mayor Holcomb; Council Member Minor. ADJOURNMENT (31) At 6:15 p.m., the meeting of the Mayor and Common Council was adjourned to 9:00 a.m., Tuesday, September 29, 1992, at 9:00 a.m., in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. RACHEL CLARK City Clerk By ~~-~..' ". Z/'" Melanie Vale Deputy City Clerk J By411j~ Sandra Medina Deputy City Clerk No. of Items: 47 No. of Hours: 9 31 9/21/92