HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-Council Minutes
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
300 N. uD" Street
San Bernardino. CA 92418
Website: www.sbcity.org
Mayor Pt1trick J. MorriJ
Cmmdl Members,
Esther EstmdtJ
Dennis J. Boxter
Tobin Brinker
Neil Derry
ChDs Kelley
RikU Van Johnson
Wtndy McCommack
-
MINUTES
MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL AND
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
JOINT REGULAR MEETING
AUGUST 6, 2007
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
The joint regular meeting of the Mayor and Common Council and Community
Development Commission of the City of San Bernardino was called to order by
Mayor/Chairman Morris at 1:34 p.m., Monday, August 6, 2007, in the Council
Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California.
Roll Call
Roll call was taken by City Clerk Clark with the following being present:
Mayor/Chairman Morris; Council Members/Commissioner~ Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
Derry, Johnson, McCammack; City Attorney Pemnan, City Clerk Clark, City Manager
Wilson. Absent: Council Member/Commissioner Kelley.
Council Member/Commissioner Kelley Arrived
At 1:51 p.m., Council Member/Commissioner Kelley arrived at the Council!
Commission meeting.
1. Closed Session
A. Conference with legal counsel - existing litigation - pursuant to
Government Code Section 54956.9(a):
Mazelle Dyke v. City, et al. - United States District Court Case No.
EDCV 06-00847 (V APX);
Shirley J. Goodwin v. City, et al. - United States District Court Case
No. EDCV 98-66RT (V APx);
1
08/06/2007
Tony Gorrell v. City, et al. - Workers' Compensation Appeals Board
Case No. SBR 0297969.
B. Conference with legal counsel - anticipated litigation - significant
exposure to litigation - pursuant to subdivision (b) (1), (2), (3) (A-F) of
Government Code Section 54956.9.
C. Conference with legal counsel - anticipated litigation - initiation of
litigation - pursuant to subdivision (c) of Government Code Section
54956.9.
D. Closed Session - personnel - pursuant to Government Code Section
54957.
E. Closed session with Chief of Police on matters posing a threat to the
security of public buildings or threat to the public's right of access to
public services or public facilities - pursuant to Government Code
Section 54957.
F. Conference with labor negotiator - pursuant to Government Code
Section 54957.6.
G. Conference with real property negotiator - pursuant to Government Code
Section 54956.8:
Central City North Redevelopment Project Area (Downtown
Acquisition Pro2l'lllll)
1. Property Address: 795 West 5th Street (Paradise Motel)
APN: 0134-093-41
Ne~otiatin~ Parties: Maggie Pacheco, Executive Director, on
behalf of the Redevelopment Agency, as
buyer, and Tien Lee International Limited
Corporation, property owner/seller
Under Ne~otiation: Purchase price, terms, and conditions
Reading of Resolutions & Ordinances
Deputy City Clerk Hartzel read into the record the titles of all the resolutions and
ordinances on the regular agenda of the Mayor and Common Council and Community
Development Commission.
2
08/06/2007
InvocationJPledge of Allegiance
The invocation was given by Father Barnabas Laubach of St. Bernardine Medical
Center, followed by the pledge of allegiance, led by Council Member Esther Estrada.
Moment of Silence
Mayor Morris extended condolences to the families and requested a moment of silence
in memory of William "Bill" Rainbolt, owner/operator of The Mediterranean restaurant
on Highland A venue for over 35 years; former Police Lieutenant Michael Gile, who
worked for the City's Police Department for over 23 years and created the San
Bernardino Police Honor Guard; Susan Hendrix, who worked over ten years as an
executive secretary in the Water Department; and Father Ramon "Ray" Rosales, a
native of San Bernardino and former pastor of Our Lady of Gnadalupe Church.
2. Appointments
Bicentennial Committee
. Steven Shaw - Mayor Morris
. David E. Smith - Mayor Morris
. Beverly Bird - Council Member McCammack
Board of Building Commissioners
. Bob Edwards - Council Member Kelley
Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Kelley, that the appointments of Steven Shaw, David E.
Smith, Beverly Bird, and Bob Edwards, as requested by Mayor Morris, Council
Member McCammack, and Council Member Kelley, be approved.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Derry,
Council Members/
Kelley, Johnson,
3. Proclamations & Presentations
Jim Gerstenslager, Director of the Western Regional Little League
Headquarters, accompanied by two of the Little League players participating in
this year's tournament-Jack Freedman from Washington and Jesse Lambert
from Utah-presented a shadowbox containing team pins of every team
participating in the Western Regionals to Mayor Morris.
Council Member Johnson presented Certificates of Recognition to the team
members of the Inland Empire Clippers, a team of 13-year-old basketball
players who traveled to Memphis, Tennessee last month to compete in the AAU
Nationals.
3
08/06/2007
Council Member Baxter, Chairperson of this year's 41b of July Parade, and Nick
Gonzales, Assistant to the Mayor, joined Mayor Morris in presenting trophies to
the award-winning entries in this year's parade, as foIlows:
. Best Use of Theme - Native Sons of the Golden West
. Best Originality - Khmer Buddhist Temple
. Best Community Spirit - Westside Steppers
. Best Cultural Display - Danzas De Aztlan
. Best Performance - Club United of Muscoy and the Mexican Dancing
Horses
. Best Hum9r - Double D PT Cruisers
Mayor Morris presented a Certificate of Recognition to Dottie Garcia, who has
been a member of the San Bernardino Library Board of Trustees for the past ten
years and will be retiring from the board next month, acknowledging not only
her many years of dedicated service to the Library Board, but also the many
other civic contributions she has made.
4. Announcements
Announcements were made by the Mayor, members of the Common Council,
elected officials, and a representative from the Chamber of Commerce regarding
various civic, community, and chamber events and activities.
5. Waive full reading of resolutions and ordinances
Council Member/Commissioner Baxter made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Estrada, that full reading of the resolutions and
ordinances on the regular agenda of the Mayor and Common Council and
Community Development Commission, be waived.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
McCanunack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Derry ,
Council Members/
Kelley, Johnson,
6. Councll Minutes
Council Member/Commissioner Baxter made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Estrada, that the minutes of the following meeting(s) of
the Mayor and Common Council/Community Development Commission of the
City of San Bernardino be approved as submitted in typewritten form: May 21,
2007; June 4, 2007.
4
08/0612007
The motion carried by the following vote:
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
7. Claims & Payroll
Ayes:
Derry ,
Council Members/
Kelley, Johnson,
Council Member/Commissioner Baxter made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Estrada, that the claims aild payroll and the
authorization to issue warrants as listed in the memorandum dated July 16,
2007, from Barbara Pachon, Director of Finance, be approved.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
8. Personnel Actions
Ayes:
Derry ,
Council Members/
Kelley, Johnson,
Council Member/Commissioner Baxter made a motion, seconded by Council.
Member/Commissioner Estrada, that the personnel actions, as submitted by the
Chief Examiner, dated August I, 2007 (Revised 8/3/07) in accordance with
Civil Service rules and Personnel policies adopted by the Mayor and Common
Council of the City of San Bernardino, be approved and ratified.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Derry ,
Council Members/
Kelley, Johnson,
9. ORD. MC-I252 - An Ordinance of the City of San Bernardino adding
Section 8.27.110 to the San Bernardino Municipal Code regarding
recording notices of weed abatement requirements on vacant lots. FINAL
READING
Council Member/Commissioner Baxter made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Estrada, that said ordinance be adopted.
Ordinance No. MC-1252 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
10. RES. 2007-312 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City
of San Bernardino authorizing the City Manager to execute an Animal
Control Services Agreement by and between the City of San Bernardino
and the City of Fontana from July 1, 2007 through June 30, 2010, and
ratifying any action taken between July 1, 2007 and the date tbat this
resolution is adopted.
5
08/06/2007
Council Member/Commissioner Baxter made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Estrada, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. 2007-312 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
11. Designate voting delegate and alternate voting delegates. for the League of
California Cities Annual Meeting - September 5-8, 2007 in Sacramento,
California
Council Member/Commissioner Baxter made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Estrada, that Mayor Morris be designated as the City of
San Bernardino's voting delegate, and that Council Member Derry and City
Manager Wilson be designated as alternate voting delegates for the League of
California Cities Annual Conference to be held September 5-8, 2007, in
Sacramento, California.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Derry ,
Council Members/
Kelley, Johnson,
12. RES. 2007-313 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common 'Council of the City
of San Bernardino acknowledging the receipt and riling of the Annual
Statement of Investment Policy for the period July 1, 2007 through June 30,
2008.
Council Member/Commissioner Baxter made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Estrada, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. 2007-313 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
13. RES. 2007-314 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City
of San Bernardino awarding a Contract to National Plant Services, Inc. for
cleaning sewer siphons at various locations in the City of San Bernardino
(SW-D 2006/07), per Project Plan No. 12173.
Council Member/Commissioner Baxter made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Estrada, that said resolution be adopted.
6
08/06/2007
Resolution No. 2007-314 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
14. RES. 2007-315 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City
of San Bernardino authorizing the execution of a Master Agreement
Administering Agency - State Agreement for Stale Funded Projects -
Agreement No. 00051S between the City of San Bernardino and the State of
California.
Council Member/Commissioner Baxter made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Estrada, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. 2007-315 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
15. RES. 2007-316 - Resolution of the City of San Bernardino approving
Amendment No. 3 to Agreement for Professional Services with LAN
Engineering Corporation to provide engineering services for the design of
Old Waterman Canyon Bridge replacement (S807-14).
Council Member/Commissioner Baxter made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Estrada, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. 2007-316 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
16. Item Deleted
17. RES. 2007-317 - Resolution of the City of San Bernardino preliminarily
determining that the public convenience and necessity require the formation
of a landscape maintenance assessment district located in the 48tb Street and
Little Mountain Drive area without compliance with the Special Assessment
Investigation, Limitation and Majority Protest Act of 1931; declaring its
intention to proceed to order work within the district, to be known as
Assessment District No. 1065; preliminarily approving the Engineer's
Report and giving notice of a public meeting and public hearing.
7
08/06/2007
Council Member/Commissioner Baxter made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Estrada, that the Director of Development Services and
the City Clerk be authorized to proceed under SBMC 12.90 with the
establishment of a landscape maintenance assessment district in the 48lb Street
and Little Mountain Drive area (Tentative Tract Map No. 17038), to be known
as Assessment District No, 1065; and that said resolution be adopted.
The motion carried and Resolution No. 2007-317 was adopted by the following
vote: Ayes: Council Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
Derry, Kelley, Johnson, McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
18. RES. 2007-318 - Resolution of the City of San Bernardino preliminarily
determining that the public convenience and necessity require the formation
of a landscape maintenance assessment district located in the Central
Avenue and Lena Road area without compliance with the Special
Assessment Investigation, Limitation and Ml\jority Protest Act of 1931;
declaring its intention to proceed to order work within the district, to be
known as Assessment District No. 1063; preliminarily approving the
Engineer's Report and giving notice of a public hearing.
Council Member/Commissioner Baxter made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Estrada, that the Director of Development Services and
the City Clerk be authorized to proceed under SBMC 12.90 with the
establishment of a landscape maintenance assessment district in the Central
Avenue and Lena Road area (Tentative Parcel Map No. 17721), to be known as
Assessment District No. 1063; and that said resolution be adopted.
The motion carried and Resolution No. 2007-318 was adopted by the following
vote: Ayes: Council Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
Derry, Kelley, Johnson, McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
19. Item Deleted
20. Authorize the Director of Finance to amend the FY 2007/08 budget to add
both revenue and expenditure budgets for the nine (9) Development Impact
Fee Funds (DlFF)
Council Member/Commissioner Kelley stated that he wanted to point out line
item 269, Parkland and Open Space and Park Improvement, which the staff
report identified as new funds for the Verdemont Park. He stated that he
wanted to make sure that everyone understood that this is a new park that is the
Al Guhin Park, named for a former Council member in the Fifth Ward; and this
park is to be relocated to accommodate the new Verdemont Community Center,
8
08/06/2007
so it shouldn't be just the Verdemont Park-it's the Verdemont Community
Center at the Al Guhin Park.
Council Member/Commissioner McCammack made a motion, seconded by
Council Member/Commissioner Estrada, that the Director of Finance be
authorized to amend the FY 2007/08 budget to add both revenue and
expenditure budgets for the nine (9) Development Impact Fee Funds (DIFF) as
indicated in the staff report dated August 6, 2007, from Barbara Pachon,
Director of Finance.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Derry ,
Council Members/
Kelley, Johnson,
21. RES. 2007-319 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City
of San Bernardino authorizing the execution of an agreement and issuance
of a purchase order to Pierce Manufacturing, Inc. for seven (7) new Pierce
fire engines; authorizing the Finance Director or her designee to solicit bids
to purchase one utility truck, ancillary equipment and emergency medical
services equipment; and authorizing the Finance Director or designee to
solicit lease-purchase rate quotes and award a lease-purchase to the lowest
responsible leasing company.
Council Member/Commissioner Baxter made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Estrada, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. 2007-319 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
22. Item Deleted
23. Item Deleted
24. Item Deleted
25. RES. 2007-320 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City
of San Bernardino authorizing the City Manager to execute an Agreement
with the San Bernardino City Unified School District to provide contractual
services for fourteen (14) Creative Before & After-School Programs for
Success at school district sites for the period July 1, 2007 through June 30,
2008, and ratifying any action taken between July 1, 2007 and the date that
this Resolution is adopted.
9
08/0612007
City Attorney Penman abstained on this item, stating that his wife was a
member of the school board.
Council Member/Commissioner Baxter made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Estrada, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. 2007-320 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
26. RES. 2007-321 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council authorizing
the City Manager to execute an Agreement between the City of San
Bernardino and the San Bernardino City Unified School District for shared
use of the recreation facilities at the Galaxy Building and Norton Recreation
Center for the period August I, 2007 through July 31, 2009 and ratifying all
action taken between August I, 2007 and the approval of the resolution.
City Attorney Penman abstained on this item, stating that his wife was a
member of the school board.
Council Member/Commissioner Baxter made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Estrada, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. 2007-321 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Note: Due to the fact that the recommended motion contained budget language
that was inadvertently omitted, the matter was reconsidered at the
Council/Commissioner meeting of September 17, 2007, Item No. 19.
27. RES. 2007-322 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council authorizing
the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 1 to Management Agreement
between the City of San Bernardino and Coast Soccer League to provide
management services at the San Bernardino Soccer Complex for the dates
August 11-12 and September 1-3, 2007.
Council Member/Commissioner Baxter made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Estrada, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. 2007-322 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
10
08/0612007
28. RES. 2007-323 - Resolution of the City of San Bernardino approving the
destruction of certain obsolete records by the San Bernardino Police
Department.
Council Member/Commissioner Baxter made a motion, secOIllIed by Council
Member/Commissioner Estrada, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. 2007-323 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
29. RES. 2007-324 - Resolution of the City of San Bernardino ratifying the
submittal of the FY 2007 Juvenile Accountability Block Grant (JABG)
application to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
by the Police Department.
Council Member/Commissioner Baxter made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Estrada, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. 2007-324 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
30. RES. 2007-325 - Resolution of the City of San Bernardino authorizing a
vendor change for the conversion of a replacement SW AT/CBRNE vehicle
for the Police Department to North Star AKA Braun Northwest Inc, of
Chebalis, W A.
Council Member/Commissioner Baxter made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Estrada, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. 2007-325 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
31. RES. 2007-326 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council authorizing
a Services Agreement and an annual purchase order to Paramount
Protective Services, Inc. to provide jail staffing In an amount not to exceed
$334,559 for FY 2007-08 with three optional renewal years.
Council Member/Commissioner Baxter made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Estrada, that said resolution be adopted.
11
08/0612007
Resolution No. 2007-326 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
32. RES. 2007-327 - Resolution of the City of San Bernardino ratifying the
submittal of the FY 2007 Homeland Security Grant appncation to the
County Omce of Emergency Services by the Ponce Department.
Council Member/Commissioner McCammack made a motion, seconded by
Council Member/Commissioner Brinker, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. 2007-327 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
33. RES. 2007-328 - Resolution of the City of San Bernardino ratifying the
submission of the FY 2007 Edward Byrne Memorial Discretionary Grant
appncation to the Bureau of Justice Assistance by the Ponce Department.
Council Member/Commissioner Brinker made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Johnson, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. 2007-328 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
34. RES. 2007-329 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City
of San Bernardino ratifying the submittal of a grant appncation to the
United States Department of Justice, Omce of Justice Programs, Omce of
Juvenile Justice and DeHnquency Prevention, authorizing the City Manager
to execute the Grant Contract, and authorizing the Mayor's Omce to
admlni..rer the OJJDP FY 2007 Gang Prevention Coordination Assistance
Program.
Council Member/Commissioner Brinker made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Derry, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. 2007-329 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
35. RES. 2007-330 - Resolution ofthe Mayor and Common Council of the City
of San Bernardino providing for the appointment of a Mayor Pro Tempore
on an annual basis, and rescinding Resolution 2004-69.
12
08/06/2007
Council Member/Commissioner Derry made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Brinker, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. 2007-330 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson, McCammack.
Nays: Council Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter. Absent: None.
36. An Ordinance of the City of San Bernardino amending Sections 3.44.010
and 3.44.030 of the San Bernardino Municipal Code Chapter 3.44,
Telephone User's Tax to clarify original intent and remove obsolete
references. FIRST READING
Mayor Morris advised that the City Attorney had requested a one-month
continuance on this item.
Council Member/Commissioner McCammack made a motion, seconded by
Council Member/Commissioner Derry, that the matter be continued to the
CounciUCommission meeting of September 4, 2007.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Derry ,
Council Members/
Kelley, Johnson,
37. Public hearing - resolution approving annexation; resolution (".ailing a
special election and resolution certifying election results - Community
Facilities District No. 1033 (Verdemont Fire Station) Annexation No.2
RES. 2007-331 - A Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the
City of San Bernardino, California, authorizing the annexation of territory
(Annexation No.2) to Community Facilities District No. 1033 and
authorizing the levy of a special tax and submitting the levy of tax to the
qualified electors. (37 A)
RES. 2007-332 . A Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the
City of San Bernardino, California, ..ailing a special election and submitting
to the voters of Annexation No. 2 of City of San Bernardino Community
Facilities District No. 1033 propositions regarding the annual levy of special
taxes within Annexation No. 2 and the establishment of an appropriations
limit. (378)
RES. 2007-333 - A Resolutioll of the Mayor and Common Council of the
City of San Bernardino, California, making certain findings, certifying the
results of an election and adding property to Community Facilities District
No. 1033, Annexation No.2. (37C)
13
08/06/2007
Mayor/Chairman Morris opened the hearing.
City Manager Wilson advised that this item relates to a new project which is
located on the south side of Industrial Parkway between Cable Creek and
Devil's Creek Flood Control Channels consisting of one industrial building to be
built on ten acres. He stated that all of the projects in this area are essentially
annexed into what is known as the Verdemont Fire Station Service Area, and
this action would annex this project into that facilities district for the purpose of
funding the operations of the Verdemont Fire Station.
Mayor/Chairman Morris asked whether there were any public comments.
Pursuant to Resolution No. 2000-279, City Clerk Clark administered an oath to
speaker Jim Fullmer that he would provide true and honest testimony.
Jim Fullmer, 1725 South Grove A venue, Ontario, CA, stated that he was
attending the meeting on behalf of Vic De Pietro, who lives in Seattle,
Washington, and is the applicant of this request for adoption; and he was there
to answer any questions that anyone might have.
Mayor/Chairman Morris asked City Clerk Clark whether any written protests
had been received.
Ms. Clark answered in the negative.
Mayor/Chairman Morris asked City Clerk Clark if she concurred in the holding
Qf the special election for the Community Facilities District Annexation.
Ms. Clark answered in the affirmative.
Mayor/Chairman Morris declared that since a majority protest had not been
filed, the Mayor and Council could proceed to annex Annexation No. 2 to
Community Facilities District No. 1033 by adopting Resolutions 37A and 37B,
as shown above.
Council Member/Commissioner Kelley made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Johnson, that the hearing relative to Annexation No. 2
to Community Facilities District No. 1033, be closed; and that said resolutions
A and B, be adopted.
The motion carried and Resolution Nos. 2007-331 and 2007-332 were adopted
by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members/Commissioners Estrada,
Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson, McCammack. Nays: None. Absent:
None.
14
08/06/2007
Mayor/Chairman Morris requested City Clerk Clark to tabulate the election
results, and stated that if more than two-thirds of the votes received were in
favor of the propositions voted upon, the Mayor and Council may declare the
election results by adopting Resolution 37C, as shown above, a resolution
making certain findings, certifying the results of an election and adding property
to Community Facilities District No. 1033, Annexation No.2.
Council Member/Commissioner Kelley made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Johnson, that said resolution C, be adopted.
Resolution No. 2007-333 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
38. RES. 2007-334 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City
of San Bernardino authorizing the City Manager to execute Amendment
No. 3 to the Agreement between the City of San Bernardino and Boys and
Girls Club of San Bernardino Inc., to operate a community center located
at 2969 Nortb Flores Street, San Bernardino, California. (Continued from
July 16, 2(07)
Council Member/Commissioner Johnson stated that as a board member of the
Boys and Girls Club he would abstain on this item. He left the Council
Chambers and returned after the vote was taken.
Council' Member/Commissioner Kelley made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Derry, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. 2007-334 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley,
McCammack. Nays: None. Abstentions: Council Member/Commissioner
Johnson. Absent: None.
39. 1-210 Corridor Enbancement Plan (Continued from July 16, 2(07)
Terri Rahhal, Deputy Director/City Planner, stated that the 1-210 Enhancement
Plan had been prepared by a consultant team led by the IBI Group, with
participation by Tatsumi & Partners, Weiland Associates, Arellano Associates,
and the Arroyo Valley Community Economic Development Corporation. She
stated that the plan had been prepared with a community planning grant from
Caltrans, and the purpose of the grant program is to involve the public in
community planning on items related to transportation projects/transportation
corridors.
15
08/06/2007
She stated that this plan presents several integrated strategies for enhancement of
the 1-210 corridor through the city of San Bernardino; and that one of the key
recommendations of the plan is the focus on land use planning and economic
development in the area of the new interchange of University Parkway with
Interstate 210 as a gateway to the community.
Ms. Rahhal stated that there would be a brief presentation by the consultant, but
first she wanted to present staff's recommendation, which was that the Mayor
and Common Council receive and file the 1-210 Corridor Enhancement Plan;
and direct staff to incorporate its strategies in a specific plan to be prepared in
conjunction with the upcoming analysis of the Northwest Redevelopment Plan.
Richard Dial, HDR, Inc., formerly with the ml Group and project manager
and lead consultant on the team that prepared the Corridor Plan, provided an
overview of the plan. He stated that one of the primary areas of focus was the
area around State Street and the Muscoy community that is going to be renamed
University Parkway. He advised that they looked at a quarter mile area on
either side of the 1-210 corridor throughout the city, and while the
recommendations may be focused on the area around University Parkway, they
are applicable to all the areas of the corridor.
Mr. Dial advised that they had five strategies and had come up with the analogy
of a puzzle, and it truly was a puzzle because all of the pieces of the Corridor
Enhancement Plan rely upon each other for success. He stated that one of the
key components of the plan was the involvement of the community, and they
were grateful to have the involvement of the community throughout the
development of the plan.
He stated that the first strategy was the Freeway Screening Strategy, and that
had two primary components. First, they looked at the freeway itself and how
they could create a situation in which the freeway would provide benefits, but
reduce the impact to businesses and residents along the way. He stated that a
number of recommendations were run by the community, and the community's
preference was to see sound walls with vines, accompanied by low-water
landscaping: Also, as part of the freeway screening strategy, when they looked
at the concept of creating a gateway for the City at its western border, they
provided the community with a number of different design alternatives; and the
community favored a contemporary design with a Spanish revival influence. He
stated that the idea was to have a city gateway in the University Parkway area
with a very street-level focus, so that it created the opportunity for a walkable
area in the city.
He advised that in terms of the Multi-Modal Mobility Strategy, and recognizing
that the car is king in southern California, there is, nevertheless, a role that can
be played by providing a good integrated system of transit, bicycling, and
16
08/06/2007
pedestrian access; and that involves supporting wider sidewalks to really
encourage people to get out and walk several abreast so they are able to partake
of the things that will be developed not only in the University Parkway area, but
throughout the corridor over time. This investment in streetscape can create a
lot of synergy with all of the other elements, such as the economic development
element, and also encourages completion of the planned bicycle route through
the study. He pointed out that they recognize that this plan is somewhat
dependent not only on the City and its residents and its businesses, but also on
cooperation with other major stakeholders including Omnitrans, the County,
Caltrans, and others.
In terms of specific recommendations in the Multi-Modal Strategy, after meeting
with members of the community they identified the need for additional bus
frequencies and services along Highland; consideration of new north/south
transit routes, especially with the completion of the connector between the
university and Highland; and future expansions of University Parkway, which
would provide an additional means to create good connectivity for people and
encourage the use of bicycles with the buses, etc.; and also the development of a
park and ride facility at University Parkway. This facility would be the catalyst
where people would park and have ancillary services available for them so that
the economic development in that area would work hand in hand with providing
a means for people to come to the city, or to come from the city and take
advantage of express services provided by Omnitrans.
Mr. Dial advised that from an Economic Development Strategy perspective,
they looked at three different scenarios for the development of the University
Parkway area. The one that was selected by the community and that offered the
best balance was a mixed use transit oriented development. This would include
higher densification at the gateway of the city, and it would provide for
conceptual land uses that would work with the other elements in the Corridor
Enhancement Plan. He stated that the next phase of this plan was to take the
recommendations forward and develop a Specific Plan for this area.
He stated that they wanted to derme uses that would increase the economic
development activity in the area, and one of the recommended ideas for making
the neighborhoods along the corridor more vital was a two-pronged program
involving increased code enforcement to work with the homeowners to identify
deficiencies and get those corrected to raise home values, as well as making the
City's investment in sidewalks and other streetscape improvements. The other
half of the program is to make homeowners aware of, and to promote the
continued use of a number of excellent programs that are already in place in the
City, and also reduce some of the residency requirements that may prove a little
onerous so that more people can get involved to beautify their neighborhoods.
In terms of noise attenuation, he stated that they recognize the completion of the
freeway is going to bring additional traffic that could have impacts, so one of
17
08/0612007
the things that they looked at was to identify specific locations alling the freeway
where the noise levels might be higher as a result of the increased traffic. In
those areas they looked at a number of different alternatives for how
homeowners and businesses could alleviate the noises and they could
recommend specific solutions. He stated that those solutions essentially are
through the use of sound walls, including recommending sound walls in those
areas where there are no sound walls and where there are currently no plans to
provide them, as well as recommending that the existing program to assist
homeowners with acoustic upgrades be continued.
Council Member/Commissioner Johnson acknowledged Lorna Foster from
Caltrans, who, through Caltrans, gave the City the seed money ($250,000) for
this plan, and Angela Saunders, who was the one who sought this money out
and brought it to the City so this plan could be formulated. He stated that it was
a good start and would allow the City to look at a new emerging area in the city
that is eventually going to put a lot of money on the tax rolls.
Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Baxter, that the Mayor and Common Council receive
and file the 1-210 Corridor Enhancement Plan; and direct staff to incorporate its
strategies in a specific plan to be prepared in conjunction with the upcoming
analysis of the Northwest Redevelopment Plan. (Note: The motion was
subsequently amended.)
Council Member/Commissioner McCarnmack asked if there was anything
addressed in this particular plan, or whether it would be addressed during the
specific plan, regarding the difficulty with the on- and off-ramps with the new
connection between the 210 and the 215, which has created quite a few
unintended consequences. She noted that the detour signs when you are going
westbound on the 215 send you through what is soon to be some wonderful
development in the Sixth Ward, but it also sends people, unintended, through a
lot of other little neighborhoods, creating huge amounts of traffic congestion that
were completely unintended.
She stated that she was hoping that the maker of the motion would allow a
friendly amendment to the motion to also incorporate strategies that would
solve, mitigate, and/or diminish the effects or unintended consequences created
by opening the 210 without the additional off-ramps that are truly necessary.
She stated that another big concern she had, that was not included in the plan,
was the fact that there are a lot of folks along the new 210 that have been there
all along when it was called the 30 Freeway and have borne a huge reduction in
property values because of the 30 Freeway going right through their back yards.
She stated that for years they asked for sound walls, and for years they were
18
08/0612007
told there was no money for sound walls, but that when the 210 broke through,
then there would be money for sound walls.
She noted that this plan did not talk about sound walls through that portion
where it is now the old 30 Freeway. Therefore, it was suggested by several of
the homeowners in those neighborhoods that the City at least provide for them
some grant money that will help them to at least put in double-pane windows
and upgrade their doors; and possibly some other types of grant monies that
would help them reduce the amount of sound.
Ms. McCammack stated that the third and more important thing that has
occurred (unintended consequences again), is the loss of revenue to the
businesses along Highland A venue-that some of these little mom and pop
businesses have had more than a 50 percent cut in revenues because of the
changes in the freeways.
She stated that she would like to make sure that staff includes mitigation efforts
for the homeowners that are not going to get sound walls, traffic mitigation
efforts until there are properly placed' off-ramps and on-ramps and efforts to
mitigate the impact to businesses along Highland Avenue.
Council Member/Commissioner Kelley stated that he was going to support the
item, but he wanted to bring to the attention of the City Manager that everything
in life is an experience, and maybe we can take some of the lessons learned
from what we are doing here and apply them to some of those sections along the
215 Freeway that he referenced earlier-those two particular off-ramps, but also
a section between University Parkway and Palm/Kendall, near Littlefield Shultis
Park that could probably use a sound wall. He stated that he thought this would
do two things-provide a better image of our city as folks come through our city
from the north and provide quiet for the residents that live there and have had to
deal with the traffic for so many years.
Mayor/Chairman Morris noted that Council Member/Commissioner
McCammack had asked for an amendment to the motion. He asked Ms. Rahhal
whether the attenuation of sound impacting those residents that abide alongside
the 30 Freeway had been addressed within the project that was being discussed
today.
Ms. Rahhal stated that relative to the issue of sound impacts adjacent to the
existing 30 Freeway, they did attempt to evaluate what those impacts would be.
They took some sound measurements in the field before the opening of the 210
and made some projections of what the noise levels would be after the freeway
opened based on estimates of traffic volumes that would be on the 210. One of
the things that was identified right away was that, yes, there is a need for
additional sound walls in the area; however, there are also additional projects by
Caltrans on that segment of the freeway and HOV lanes and so on.
19
08/06/2007
She explained that when that additional work on the freeway goes forward it
would include requirements for additional sound walls-when that part of the
freeway is worked on by Caltrans. Unfortunately, that's not immediately going
to happen. Therefore, in the meantime, their plan recommends that the best
thing to do for impacted residents in this area is to implement double paned
windows and increased insulation to make the houses airtight and more sound
proof. She stated that the plan does identify certain grants and loans that are
available to income qualifying households through the Economic Development
Agency, and those residents would be encouraged to make use of those available
resources. She noted, however, that to make a permanent solution, prior to the
additional work that is to be done on the 210, was probably not feasible.
She stated that with regard to the detours in the area of Highland A venue and
State Streets, those things actually were not completely recognized or taken into
account when they prepared this plan-partly because of the fact that the 215
and 210 interchange is not completed, and therefore certain people who are
coming, for instance, from the west and wanting to make a transition to the 215
south-they will need to exit at the University Parkway off-ramp for quite a
long time. Therefore, they would intend, through the Specific Plan effort, to
look at that interim issue, and certainly the impacts on Highland Avenue and the
changes in traffic flow that would impact businesses on Highland Avenue. She
stated that to snmmarize, she would say that the detour issues, the traffic on
Highland A venue, certainly could be incorporated into efforts on the Specific
Plan that is recommended. The sound wall issue on the remaining areas of the
30 could be addressed, but she thought they had already reached the conclusions
on those issues.
Mayor/Chairman Morris asked Ms. Rahha1 whether the studies, as she had
described them and with the explanations she had provided, were complete; and
she answered in the affirmative.
He inquired whether the City had additional resources if they were to go out and
there was further work relative to the recommendations in Ms. McCammack's
amendment to the motion to receive and file.
Ms. Rahhal stated that as she understood those recommendations, it was to
identify the issues and make recommendations available of what can be done,
and certainly they could do that.
Council Member/Commissioner Johnson, amended his motion, seconded by
Council Member/Commissioner Baxter, that the Mayor and Common Council
receive and file the 1-210 Corridor Enhancement Plan; and direct staff to
incorporate its strategies through a specific plan to be prepared in conjunction
with the upcoming analysis of the Northwest Redevelopment Plan, to include
traffic mitigation efforts relative to the on- and off-ramp situation, sound
20
08/0612007
mitigation efforts for those residents living along the 30 Freeway, and efforts to
mitigate the impact to businesses along Highland Avenue.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Derry ,
Council Members/
Kelley, Johnson,
40. Capital Improvement Program (CIP) workshop - Economic Development
Agency Boardroom - review the Five-Year Capital Improvement Program-
Fiscal Years 2007108 - 2011/12 (Continued from July 16,2007)
Note: No Staff Report was included in the backup materials.
Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Estrada, that the matter be continued to Monday,
August 13, 2007, at 5:00 p.m. in the Economic Development Agency
Boardroom.
The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members/
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Johnson, McCamrnack. Nays:
Council Member/Commissioner Kelley. Absent: None.
41. OR>>. MC-I2S3 - An Urgency Interim Ordinance of the City of San
Bernardino establishing a temporary moratorium on the establishment and
operation of new parolee/probationer group homes, registered sex offender
group homes, and unlicensed group homes, declaring the urgency thereof,
and taking effect immediately. URGENCY
City Attorney Penman stated that he wanted to clarify some matters for the
record as to when he brought some of these items forward. He stated that the
issue of parolee dumping was first raised by the City Attorney's office in 1988,
a year after he was first elected, and he has regularly found cause to discuss it
almost every year since then; however, the time when there was the most
discussion about it was in the year 2000 when they closed a number of parolee
half-way houses.
Mayor/Chairman Morris indicated that just as Mr. Penman opened up this
discussion, additional backup materials were being distributed to him and the
Council members, which as a result of this late date distribution, they did not
have a chance to review.
City Attorney Penman explained that some of this information was in the backup
materials-that one document was a correction to the registered sex offender
statistics as of July 25, 2007, and the other contained maps showing the
locations of registered sex offenders in the city.
21
08/06/2007
Mr. Penman explained that the issue of passing ordinances to address the
problem caused by illegal group homes in our city has been the subject of
ongoing discussions by the Mayor and Common Council, the City Attorney's
office, and all City departments for the past ten months. He stated that as a
result of inquiries by Council Members McCammack, Derry, and Kelley earlier
this year, his office had stepped up its work on this issue over the last five
months. However, the legal position of this City for over 20 years has been that
our Development Code is a permissive one, only permitting the uses specifically
listed in the Development Code. Consequently, any use not listed in the
Development Code is not eligible for a conditional use permit, or a City
business license (business registration certificate), and this interpretation has
been in force for many years by various City departments.
He stated that because registered sex offender group homes and those for
parolees, probationers, and unlicensed group homes are not listed in our
Development Code, our enforcement, when pursued, has been more successful
than that experienced by the recent ordinances passed by other cities. He stated
that this is because the way our code is written, we can close any registered sex
offender group home, parolee/probationer group home, or unlicensed group
home of six beds or less, unless they have a state license.
He pointed out that just last year the City brought legal action against an illegal
group home where six registered sex offenders were living next door to a
daycare center, and as a result of that they voluntarily closed their doors. He
stated that proposed measures have been discussed at both City Council
meetings and Legislative Review Committee meetings over the last 20 months.
At Council meetings an item was introduced as recently as April 16, 2007, by
Councilwoman McCammack, for an interim ordinance of the City establishing a
temporary moratorium on the establishment and operation of new residential
care or congregate care facilities of seven or more beds in residential
neighborhoods, which was referred to Legislative Review.
Additionally, on October 16, 2006, the City Attorney's office introduced to the
Council an Ordinance of the City of San Bernardino adding Chapter 9.97 to the
San Bernardino Municipal Code regarding the prohibition of sex offenders from
residing within 2,000 feet of any public or private school, park, or other place
where children regularly gather. That was also referred to Legislative Review
Committee.
He advised that the LRC had heard these matters on October 17, 2006,
September 19, 2006, December 6, 2005, and November 22, 2005; and that
these discussions had been ongoing in the City over a number of years, but
more recently over several months. He stated that there were some concerns
expressed that his office had not been communicating with the Mayor and
22
08/06/2007
Council or City Manager regarding these matters, and he thought some people
may have forgotten some of these Legislative Review Committee meetings and
some of these Council meetings.
Mr. Penman explained that at each of the LRC meetings, his staff had explained
that the ordinances that other cities are adopting to require conditional use
permits are not as effective as our ability to just go in and close these places
down if they are not licensed by the state. Consequently, over the years, they
have recommended not being aggressive in adopting these ordinances.
However, when the Council made their decision at the second meeting in July
not to have the City Attorney's office coordinate those inspections, that brought
up the need to look at these ordinances more closely.
Mr. Penman noted that there was some concern whether at the last meeting they
had discussed this beforehand. He reminded the Mayor of the press release put
out the week before the July 16 meeting in which the Mayor said that Mr.
Penman had repeatedly sought from him the authority to control and dictate
code enforcement actions. He stated that actually, it would be a mistake for the
City Attorney's office to control and dictate Code Enforcement's actions
because if his office did that, in effect they would be taking over the job of the
Code Enforcement Director and the Fire Chief; and as Mr. Brinker indicated at
that meeting, that would be contrary to the Charter.
He stated that they could not do that because they would then compromise the
prosecutorial immunity of which he spoke and of which Mr. Arias spoke at the
last Council meeting-that if the City Attorney is directing the Police
Department or the Fire Department or the Code Enforcement Department he is
acting outside the scope of his lawful authority and that prosecutorial immunity
is lost. He explained that what he did ask to do repeatedly, as the Mayor had
indicated, was to coordinate those inspections; and as the statement indicated, he
and the Mayor have repeatedly discussed that, as the City Manager and he have
discussed that.
Mr. Penman stated that the other thing that happened after the July 16 meeting,
was that his office received from the City Manager's office, at least they thought
it was from the City Manager's office, a copy of the Newport Beach
moratorium ordinance. However, he just learned this morning, talking to Mr.
Wilson and to the secretary in his office who brought that ordinance down to his
office, what actually happened. On July 22, Council Member McCammack
received that ordinance from a constituent and she faxed that ordinance to the
City Manager's office. The next day she faxed the same ordinance to his (Mr.
Penman's) office, and that same day, July 23, Cathy, in Mr. Wilson's office,
brought the ordinance down to his (Mr. Penman's) office and he was informed
that the City Manager had sent a copy of the same ordinance that Mrs.
McCammack sent regarding the Newport Beach moratorium. Then, without
looking at the copy that came from the City Manager's office, he said to give
23
08/06/2007
that to Mr. Empefio. Therefore, when his office put together this ordinance,
they were working on the assumption that they had been requested by both the
Council member and the City Manager to prepare this ordinance-and that is
how this ordinance came about.
He stated that as indicated in the draft ordinance that they sent out on July 31, a
number of cities have adopted ordinances involving parolees, unlicensed group
homes, etc.; and that the City of Redlands and the City of Highland have both
adopted moratoriums on these group homes. In addition, Redlands, Highland,
Fontana, Ontario, Riverside, Hesperia, Apple Valley, Victorville, Murrietta,
and Yucaipa have also adopted ordinances regulating the zoning of these group
homes. The thought that his office had when they saw this ordinance from Mrs.
McCammack and then through the City Manager's office, was that if such an
ordinance was enacted, which the law allows us to put in place for 45 days
prohibiting any new group homes from coming here, then the Mayor and
Council would have the opportunity to study what these other cities have done
and decide which of their ordinances, if any, they want to enact; or there might
be some new ordinances that could be helpful to our City. He stated that it
seemed to him that it was a less threatening proposal than, as he found out at the
last Council meeting, the idea of his office coordinating the inspections was.
So, they sent it out first to be circulated on July 31, and they received some
responses to it. Then on August 3 they put it on the agenda with the backup.
Mr. Penman pointed out that the Mayor and Council had a thick document
before them that listed the registered sex offenders. He stated that they made
changes from the information they were originally given to drop those that were
in County islands. He also displayed maps prepared by Information Technology
showing the location of registered sex offenders living throughout the city and
indicated there was also a map by wards.
Mr. Penman stated that someone had suggested that the City Attorney should
not be proposing this language. He stated that the charter makes it clear that the
City Attorney has the legal responsibility and shall prosecute all violations of the
municipal code and those violations of state law which the City Attorney is
authorized to prosecute in the state law without the permission of the district
attorney and also to prosecute those violations that are vice or drug related. He
stated that it was in the context of that, that much of this information was
brought forward to the Mayor and Council.
Finally, Mr. Penman stated that he thought this was a good ordinance, it had
been requested by some of the Council members, it was passed to his office
from the City Manager, and he thought they wanted him to do something with
it.
Mayor/Chairman Morris stated that he wanted to be very clear-he was
completely supportive of any ordinance that regulates parolee homes in this
24
08/06/2007
city-and that we should have stayed on top of this issue and had better
ordinances on this issue a long, long time ago. He indicated that Mr. Penman
was the one responsible for staying on top of these municipal code updates; in
fact, Mr. Penman has told members of this Council and the general public that
he is the keeper of the code. He stated that Mr. Penman had a responsibility, as
a City Attorney, to maintain a modem, efficient, and effective code for this City
and to give specific recommendations to this Mayor and Common Council with
regard to these very issues and the new laws that are applicable. He indicated
that in his view, Mr. Penman had been asleep at the switch.
The Mayor stated that prior to discussing the proposed moratorium, he wanted
to voice several very serious concerns related to the proposed moratorium and to
the issue of unlicensed group homes; and they were five in number. He asked
for patience because he had to do some detail work-that he had to spend an
inordinate amount of his time over the last five days digesting both Mr.
Penman's ream of material and the related laws that surround this issue.
Mayor/Chairman Morris outlined the following concerns: First, a failure to
follow legislative process. He noted that the proposed ordinance moratorium
was placed on the agenda by the City Attorney without following the time-
honored legislative process our City has had in place for decades that ensures
legislative proposals receive a full and thorough airing-a review and discussion
and recommendations before it comes before the full Council. He stated that the
Council has the Legislative Review Committee, whose job it is to review
proposed changes to our municipal code; and the proposal placed before the
City Council today was never discussed or reviewed by the LRC before today's
hearing. Thus, they had no recommendation from that committee and its
members, and that concerned him. They had not followed a deliberative
process called a lawmaking process to research this matter on the agenda.
Two. A failure by Mr. Penman to collaborate or consult with elected
policymakers and those departments in our City that are affected by this
proposed moratorium. He failed to consult, work with, discuss, review, or
share this proposal with any of the elected policymakers in the City-with the
Council, with his office, with him personally-nor did he consult, work with, or
discuss it with the departments-with the City Manager, the Police Chief, Code
Enforcement Department, and Development Services.
According to the Mayor, the first time any of these individuals had any word
about this proposal was on Wednesday morning after the draft agenda had been
prepared and published and five days before this meeting-with many of them
becoming aware of it through a newspaper article that had been leaked to the
press the night before. As a result, they had been forced to digest and evaluate
and react to a very complex issue within a matter of days before this Council
meeting. He stated that in simple terms, they had the City Attorney attempting,
25
08/06/2007
in his view, to literally hijack the lawmaking process and engage in what he
described as "policymaking by surprise."
Three. Five months of work and all we have is a proposed moratorium to yet
study this matter further. Mayor/Chairman Morris noted that the City Attorney
claimed in his memorandum that he deposited on their desks last Wednesday,
that he had been working on this matter for some five months; and if that was
true, it was even more nnllcceptable that he had kept everyone in this City in the
dark about this issue for the past five months.
Mayor/Chairman Morris advised that there were numerous meetings of the LRC
during that time period and not once had this proposed moratorium been
discussed. In addition, the City Manager is ten steps down the hall on the sixth
floor from the City Attorney's office-yet not a word-nothing. The Mayor's
office is just a few steps beyond that-not a word-nothing. He stated that of
even more concern to him was the fact that after five months of work, all they
had before them was a proposed moratorium. He pointed out that if the City
Attorney had in fact collaborated and discussed and reviewed this with those
who have important responsibilities with regards to lawmaking (meaning the
Council, his office, and those affected departments-Police, Code Enforcement,
etc.) they would have had before them today an ordinance that had been
carefully reviewed in the orderly process of lawmaking and not a moratorium
that will lead to more discussion.
Four. Other cities, as has been pointed out, have been far more aggressive on
this issue than ours. Mayor/Chairman Morris pointed out that other cities
around us have been far more aggressive and far more progressive in updating
their municipal codes to address this issue. He stated that in March of 2003,
our state's attorney general issued a very clear opinion, "that cities can prohibit,
limit, or regulate the operation of boarding and rooming homes in a single-
family, low-density residential zone in order to protect and preserve the
residential character of the neighborhood." He stated that the opinion was clear
and concise, and aggressive cities around this state immediately went to work
. and upgraded and updated their municipal codes to better regulate the problem
of problematic, unlicensed group homes. In fact, many of those progressive
cities, as pointed out in Mr. Penman's memorandum, are our neighbors-
Fontana and Apple Valley immediately updated their codes in 2003, Riverside
added aggressive measures in 2004, Redlands addressed the issue in 2005, and
Victorville in 2006.
The Mayor stated that additionally, in January of this year, a new law went into
effect-Assembly Bill 2184-that clarified even further that cities can regulate
these kinds of unlicensed group homes. But here we are, August 2007-four
years after the attorney general's opinion, years after other cities have acted and
enforced more aggressive laws on unlicensed group homes, and eight months
26
08/0612007
after clarifying the new law for the legislature-and we're talking about a
moratorium.
Mayor/Chairman Morris stated that last Wednesday after receiving the proposed
moratorium, he had his office call the Riverside City Attorney to ask how their
city had been doing in enforcing their modem .and aggressive code provisions
with regard to group homes for the past three years; and he said they had been
incredibly successful-that he has been going around the state for the past
several years, spP.JIking to city attorneys on this very matter. In fact, he invited
our City to put together a team to sit down with him and with other Riverside
department heads who are working with them on this, to review their modem
codes, their procedures, and their successes in this matter. And he said, "Let's
do it the earliest possible date. "
The Mayor indicated that if we had asked Riverside's city attorney that same
question three years ago, we would have had the start of a great collaborative
process that would have led to modernized codes in this City three years past.
Instead, we are literally years late in bringing this forward to update our City
code while other cities around have already done this. He stated that it is
embarrassing, and most importantly, it has continued to let our City be at risk
on these very issues.
Five. The City Attorney says that uulicensed group homes have been illegal in
this city for decades. So, the question for us is, "What have we been doing?"
He stated that this morning they received a new memorandum from the City
Attorney on this issue, which again, most of them barely had enough time to
digest, and Mr. Penman made the following comments:
A. First, Mr. Penman's memorandum claims that the issue of updating our
City's ordinance as related to group homes, has been the subject of open
discussions by the Mayor, Council, and involved departments for the last 20
months. The Mayor asked how then it was possible that no one, except perhaps
the three Council members he alludes to in his memorandum, have had any
inkling that the City Attorney was allegedly working on a draft ordinance. The
Mayor stated that to support his claim, Mr. Penman cited a couple of Council
meetings and a couple of alleged Legislative Review Committees where he said
the matter was discussed. The Mayor stated that he had actually checked the
minutes of those meetings, and in many cases it wasn't discussed. Discussions
in these meetings were mostly general discussions about what other cities were
doing in the areas of group homes, parolee homes, sex offender regulations.
Never once were any specific revisions of our code ever brought forward by the
City Attorney's office, or even discussed. Never once was a specific proposal
made, or direction given to the LRC about what the law could be or should be
to protect our citizenry.
27
08/06/2007
B. The Mayor went on to say that Mr. Penman's memorandum, which they
received this morning, states that small, unlicensed group homes, such as
rooming and boarding houses with six or fewer people, have been illegal in our
city for decades. The City Attorney states, and today in his presentation he
stated that his legal opinion is based on the idea, that if a land use is not listed in
our Development Code, it is not allowed by the law. As the City Attorney is
fond of saying, we have only a permissive Development Code, but so does
every other city in this state. This basic land use law concept applies to every
city development code throughout the state. The reality is, however, that in
dealing with land uses that potentially involve legal or constitutional issues, such
as group housing, if you don't carefully define the type of use you want to
prohibit, limit, or regulate, you can find yourself in very, very messy and
expensive litigation. That's why cities across the state have moved aggressively
to update their municipal codes.
The Mayor advised that in 2003 the law became clear on small group homes in
single-family residential areas of all cities. Other cities reacted quickly, updated
their codes upon specific recommendations and proposals by their city attorneys,
and we sat still. He noted that the City Attorney stated today in his memo that
our City has full authority to close any unlicensed group home because that land
use is not listed in our Development Code. Then why hasn't the City Attorney,
with his City-chartered prosecutorial powers, prosecuted dozens upon dozens of
illegal group homes that are in our city and inundate our residential
neighborhoods.
The Mayor went on to state that today, as so often happens here in this City, he
thought Mr. Penman would once again play the blame game. For example, "I
was issued orders not to close illegal uses." That is a false statement. "I didn't
have the cooperation of other departments." Not true. "I wasn't given the
resources." Not true. He addressed Mr. Penman, stating that based upon the
bold declarations in his memorandum given to the Mayor and Council this
morning, our City has had for decades the strongest municipal code provisions
prohibiting unlicensed group homes and group living arrangements; and
unfortunately, the responsibility for the existence of any illegal group homes in
our city lies nowhere else but at the feet of Mr. Penman's office.
Finally, the Mayor stated that he wanted to bring up two conversations that
individuals have had with the City Attorney regarding this issue during the past
two weeks, because he thought it highlighted the contradictory and politicized
legal advice we receive from our legal counsel.
As described in his July 31 memorandum two weeks ago, Councilman Brinker
contacted Mr. Penman about three clustered, unlicensed, small group homes in
his ward that he was concerned about because of the number of parolees and
registered sex offenders purportedly living in those residences. When
Councilman Brinker asked what could be done about the situation, he was told
28
08/06/2007
by Mr. Penman, "Nothing can be done." How could nothing be done if the
City Attorney knows the uses are clearly illegal, or prohibited in our city.
Moreover, if, as the City Attorney claims, he had been working on a proposed
moratorium for months, why not tell Councilman Brinker that he had an
important issue that he had been working on and would be coming back to the
Council with this proposal.
In similar fashion, the Police Chief also got a call from Councilman Brinker
about those three unlicensed group homes in his ward. After receiving the call,
the police were dispatched to investigate. After investigating the issue and
finding that indeed there were those persons there that concern Mr. Brinker and
his constituents, the Police Chief contacted the City Attorney and asked what
could be done about the situation; and again, the Police Chief was told, "They
are legal-nothing can be done. "
The Mayor addressed the Council members, stating that it was clear that
something could be done, and should have been done years ago. He stated that
updated, modem ordinances are needed that will regulate problematic unlicensed
group homes in this city, and they need to aggressively enforce those
ordinances.
The Mayor advised that the proposed moratorium asks for 45 days to study this
issue and bring back an updated ordinance. However, because other cities have
already paved the way years ago, he didn't think 45 days were needed-that
there are plenty of examples out there. He stated that they must act more
quickly, and they must work as they have not worked thus far, coIlaboratively,
on this issue-as a Mayor, as a Council, as a Police Department, as Code
Enforcement, as a City Attorney; and they can rely on the work of other
departments who are way ahead of us on this issue.
Council Member/Commissioner McCammack stated that the Mayor had made
some false statements about her personally; therefore, she wanted to hear Mr.
Penman's response to all of these accusations, and after he was done she wanted
the Mayor to correct the incorrect statements he made about her personally.
City Attorney Penman responded to the Mayor's comments, as foIlows: "Your
honor, first of all, I fInd it somewhat incredible that you would say that we
should foIlow cities who have been contacting us, including Riverside, and
teIling us, "we wish we had not made the mistake of putting group homes into
our development codes"-and that includes Riverside. We don't need any new
ordinances if this Council would let us do what we did in the year 2000. We
closed down seven illegal group homes within a couple of months. When Mr.
Brinker called me, and asked me what we could do, I said "nothing," but he
didn't finish the statement-"nothing, since the Council,majority voted not to
permit the City Attorney's office to coordinate those inspections." And I told
him if that had happened, we could have gone in now and closed them.
29
08/0612007
Now the Mayor says we are exposed to liability if we do that. We never got
sued for years, and we did it year after year. The key to it, as I explained at the
last meeting, was prosecutorial immunity. That is why we didn't get sued. It
wasn't that the people whose group homes were closed didn't threaten to sue or
didn't contact us-they did. We pointed them to the law; we told their lawyers
what the cases said. Now, these ordinances that these other cities have
adopted-they've adopted them because their development codes allow group
homes, and they are playing catch-up. And the group homes that are already in
existence in those cities, even if they pass new ordinances they don't affect
them. He added that State parole admitted that they moved 200 parolees out of
San Bernardino in the year 2000 while they had the cap on; and they did not
transfer any new ones in, until those inspections were stopped.
Mr. Penman reminded the Mayor that he (the Mayor) had written an opinion
piece to the newspaper that was entitled, Parolee Homes Good for San
Bernardino, in which he had criticized those inspections, said they shouldn't
have done them, said the people they found didn't have any warrants for their
arrests, that they didn't find any guns or drugs, and that they should have left.
He stated that the Mayor told them that he knew all about these laws. He stated
that they knew about the laws, and they have discussed them, and Councilman
Kelley has put them on the agenda, and Mrs. McCarnmack has put them on the
agenda. In fact, the City Attorney's office put one on the agenda in October of
'06-it went to Legislative Review-that had to do with prohibiting sex
offenders from residing within 2000 feet of any public or private school, park or
other place.
Directing his comments to the Mayor, Mr. Penman stated, "I have been asking
you since you became mayor to let us go out and do what we did in 2000.
Mayor, if these ordinances pass, they affect new group homes coming in. As
you know, they may well not be allowed to affect group homes already existing.
Yet we could go out today, if this Council would let us, not in charge of, but
coordinating these inspections and requesting the assistance of police, fIre, and
code enforcement, and we could close some of these places down now. "
Mayor/Chairman Morris replied that they have been doing that all along.
City Attorney Penman countered that they haven't been; and asked when was
the last time the Mayor closed a group home?
Mayor/Chairman Morris stated that they have been doing exactly what Mr.
Penman was talking about-coordinating as a team these issues of code
enforcement.
30
08/06/2007
Mr. Penman stated that was true with apartments, but not with parolee group
homes, and that he and the Mayor had discussed that many times-that those
once-a-month inspections they have are of apartments.
Mayor/Chairman Morris indicated that Mr. Penman had the sole responsibility
for decisions to prosecute code violations.
Mr. Penman answered that he couldn't prosecute them if he couldn't go out and
investigate, and they couldn't do that unless the code officers and fire inspectors
could go out with police protection-and this Council refused at the last meeting
to let them do that.
Mayor/Chairman Morris stated that Mr. Penman had totally misinterpreted what
happened at the last meeting-that he had the authority to do what he had just
asked Council's permission to do. He stated that Mr. Penman didn't need
Council authority to prosecute.
Mr. Penman responded: "Then why can't I call the Police Chief and say, we're
going to have an inspection, would you loan us some officers? Why can't I call
Code Enforcement and ask for assistance?"
Mayor/Chairman Morris replied that when he said to Mr. Penman that he had
that authority, all he was saying to him is that we'll coordinate with Police and
Code Enforcement.
Mr. Penman then countered that that was the item that was on the agenda-that
was Mr. Derry's motion and the Mayor had voted it down.
The Mayor answered that he (Mr. Penman) was right, because the item was to
put Mr. Penman in charge.
Mr. Penman stated that they were not authorized to enforce fire codes, and most
of these group homes close down before they even have to go to court because
they find so many fire code violations. He noted that he and the Mayor were
obviously going to disagree; however, he still respected the Mayor.
Council Member/Commissioner McCammack reminded the Mayor and he was
not the policymaker-they (the Council) were. She stated that she needed to
clarify for the public so they didn't misunderstand what the Mayor was saying-
that he was not the policymaker-they were.
City Attorney Penman stated that in light of the decision by the City Council not
to allow them to resnme the inspections that they did so successfully in 2000,
these ordinances that other cities have adopted (which he stated are less effective
than our own current Development Code, and which those cities have said that
they wished they had not put the group homes and other categories into their
31
08/0612007
development codes, because it could be interpreted to allow parolee group
homes), are the next best thing, but they are not the best thing-the best thing is
inspections.
Mayor/Chairman Morris stated that Mr. Penman stood alone in that analysis-
that there were no other cities that do what he had just suggested-that to the
best of his knowledge, what you have are cities moving aggressively in the
manner he described, consistent with Lockyer's decision in 2003, that allows
cities to regulate these land uses.
Mr. Penman stated that he would respectfully encourage the Mayor and
Council, if they were not going to reconsider their action of July 16, to put in
place this urgency ordinance. He noted that the Mayor had asked why they only
had this one moratorium ordinance, but that they had a lot more than this.
However, the purpose of the urgency ordinance is to freeze everything so that
Council can look at everything else without new group homes sneaking in while
they are in the process of doing that.
Mayor/Chairman Morris stated that he understood what the purpose of the
moratorium was-his only suggestion was that they do it with more dispatch.
Mr. Penman ascertained that the law only allowed them to do 45 days, then it
allowed them to do five months more, and then it allowed them to do two years
more-and Redlands and Highland and other cities are doing that-and it is a
way to keep new group homes from coming in for a number of years. He stated
that the job of the City Attorney was merely to bring it before them, and at the
last meeting he had brought them a way to solve, or at least greatly reduce, the
number of illegal parolee homes in this city. However, they chose not to do
that. Now he has come back with what he believes is the next best thing.
Council Member/Commissioner Brinker stated that he had a group of people
who had been waiting very patiently here tonight, who lived on the street
discussed earlier in the meeting that now has 13-15 sex offenders living on their
street; and he wanted to clarify exactly what they can and cannot do. His
questions to Mr. Penman were, "If our City Manager directs you and our Police
Chief and our Firefighters and our Code Enforcement to go to that house and do
an inspection, can we do it? Do we have the immunity that you have talked
about, and can we close them down?"
Mr. Penman answered that in his opinion, asking the City Manager to take
charge of those inspections would be like the District Attorney asking Mark
Uffer, the County Administrative Officer, to take his prosecutorial functions.
He stated that if the City Manager is the one making the request, it's not for
prosecutorial purposes, but if the City Attorney's office makes the request,
which is why he came to the Council July 16, and they go there and they find
that they don't have State licenses, yes, they can close them. If they go there
32
08/06/2007
and find they are in violation of fire codes, which most of these places usually
are, the Fire Department can close them right away. They can close them by
going to court.
Mr. Penman stated that he couldn't tell the Council if this place was licensed,
definitively, or if they have any fire code violations; but if they went out there
and found fire code violations, or they asked them to produce a license and they
didn't have a license, they are in violation. He stated that if it was a fire code
violation-a life and safety issue-they would close them right away. If it's no
license, they take that information to court, because they are required to have
their license on the premises. He added that they do have trouble getting
information sometimes on who has licenses and who doesn't, but insofar as
collaboration is concerned, they have developed a close working relationship
with the licensing department in Riverside. He stated that they have
acknowledged that they have some problems in their record keeping of some
places in terms of whether they have licenses or not, but they come with the
City's team and they are the ones that will ask for the license. And they will
find out pretty quick if they've got one or not.
Mr. Brinker asked again, "So, can we close it down?" Mr. Penman answered,
"We possibly can. "
Council Member/Commissioner Brinker stated that he was still confused, so he
was going to try his best to clarify it-that he needed clarification. He
questioned whether Mr. Penman was saying that he was the only person who
could make that determination as to whether or not they should go there.
Mr. Penman said he was not saying that-what he was saying was, if they
request it as part of a case where they have already determined the probable
cause to file it, then they have prosecutorial immunity.
Mr. Brinker then said, "But, you said, that you don't have any firefighters who
work for you, or any code enforcement or police officers-they don't work for
you. So, how is it that you are able to make this determination that we need to
go there. "
Mr. Penman answered, "We make the request to use their resources and their
skills. What we do before that is, we would have already received from Code,
Fire, and/or the Police Department sufficient information to make a
determination that enough probable cause exists to file a criminal complaint. "
Mr. Brinker rephrased his original question by asking, "If our City Manger tells
Code and Fire and Police if they find one of these places to refer them to you
and they go out and deal with it, can we do it?"
Mr. Penman answered, "Yes, but they would not have prosecutorial immunity."
33
08/06/2007
Mr. Brinker replied: "I don't understand. If they find a place, just because he
told them to go talk to you, now the immunity is gone. But if they, just on their
own, just out of the goodness of their heart, think, you know what, maybe 1
should just go talk to the City Attorney about this . . ."
Mr. Penman stated, "And that's what they usually do."
When Council Member/Commissioner Brinker stated that that made no sense to
him, Mr. Penman stated he would try to explain it even more carefully.
He stated that as a result of the last Council meeting, from here on out they.
would actually file a complaint first-they would file the complaint based on that
information. Then they would say, let's get an inspection warrant and let's go
back out with Code and Fire and Police, under their own supervisors-his office
would coordinate it, but they would not be in charge of it-they would go out,
they would gather evidence, and they would use that evidence to prove the case
they had filed. And if they happened to find new evidence, they would even
amend the complaint to add new allegations if they were there.
Mayor/Chairman Morris stated that he in no way opposed this item, but he
thought they ought to move it more quickly than the 45 days that had been
requested, because he thought they had the information required to do the job
now in modernizing our codes.
He advised that he had asked the Police Chief to do some investigation for Mr.
Penman and those at the dais, and to answer some questions about the parolee
and the sex offender population in our city and in these homes. At the Mayor's
request he had assigned a whole team of people to go out and do some important
investigations so he could share with everyone the numbers that are out there,
both parolees related to sex offenders on parole and others.
Police Chief Billdt advised that he had looked at the backup material outlined by
Mr. Penman's proposed ordinance and the memorandums dated July 27 and July
31, 2007. He noted that specifically in the backup there was reference made to
three categories of residential facilities. First, adult residential facilities-it was
stated that there are 39 located in the city-actually there are 32-7 of them are
in the County area. He stated that 15 elderly residential care facilities are noted;
however, there are 14 in the city-the other 1 is in the County. And then lastly,
there are 14 group homes-that the backup listed 15; however, there are actually
14 in the city and 1 in the County.
He stated that the Police Department has five parole liaison officers who are
charged with the responsibility of working collaboratively with State Parole to
manage the city's parole population. Those five parole liaison officers contacted
these locations as well as accessed what we call parolees. Parolees is a
34
08/06/2007
computer base which means Law Enforcement Automated Data System. Of the
total 60 care facilities in our town, they researched each one of those locations
and found the following information:
Of the 32 adult residential facilities, there are 255 total occupants-one is a
parolee. Of the 14 elderly residential care facilities, there are 412 occupants-
one is a parolee. Of the 14 licensed group homes in our community, there are
82 occupants-none of which are parolees. He stated that these three classes of
facilities-the residential care facilities, the elderly care facilities, and the group
homes-all of them were licensed by the State of California to have group
homes in our community.
Chief Billdt advised that they also took a look at all of the State of California
Department of Alcohol and Drug Program's programs in our community. He
stated that they had the opportunity to go out and review 23 of the locations, and
each of those locations was licensed by the State. Of the 204 occupants, 57 of
them are parolees-they confirmed that. He stated that they have a few more
locations to check, but because of the time constraints last week they weren't
able to physically get out to 83 different locations, but they visited a substantial
portion of them, and those are the numbers they came up with. Of all of those
facilities in our community, there were 59 parolees living in them.
They were also asked to take a look at the criteria for State licensing of
residential and out-patient drug and alcohol programs. He stated that the
licensing requirements are outlined by Title 9 of the California Code of
Regulations, Section 10501, and it defmes which facilities that are operated for
the treatment of drug and alcohol abuse.
Mayor/Chairman Morris stated that he had also asked the Chief to look at those
facilities to see if they were operating within the parameters of their State
licenses-that is, were they clean and within State regulations. He asked the
Chief what he had found in that regard.
Chief Billdt advised that each of those locations that were licensed were found to
be in compliance with State Licensing. He stated that another thing he wanted
to point out was that there are 85 licensed facilities in the County of San
Bernardino for drug and alcohol treatment; and 35 percent of those locations are
within the City limits-so we have 30 of the 85 licensed for the County within
the City of San Bernardino.
Lastly, they looked at the number of sex registrants in our community. They
got on the database some of the ones that were shown on the screen tonight, and
the actual number of sex registrants, which is governed by Penal Code Section
290, is 420 as of today.
35
08/06/2007
The Mayor inquired whether that was the number Mr. Penman had indicated in
his memorandum as being 513.
Chief Billdt stated that the memorandum outlined 50S; however, SO-some of
those registrants are in the County-they are not in the City limits. Of the 420
sex registrants, as defined by Penal Code Section 290, 93 are on active parole
and 7 are parolees at large, for a total of 100 current parolees out of the 420 sex
registrants. He explained that when a person, as a condition of their conviction
is required to register-that's for life-and Section 290 registrants have to
register for the rest of their life no matter where they go. Each time they move
they are required to register. However, parole does not last a lifetime-it lasts
usually three or four years, and that's why so many of these 290 registrants are
no longer under State Parole.
Lastly, they looked at the 1,714 known parolees in the city, as well as the 420
PC 290 sex registrants; and they are in the process of doing a file by tile search
of every parolee and every sex registrant to determine where they live in our
community, other than those that are listed living at the licensed facilities.
Mayor Morris asked how soon the Chief could have that information for the
Council.
Chief Billdt replied that they were going through 2,134 records, which takes
about 10-15 minutes each. He stated it was going to take weeks of his officers
being off the street at their computers researching this data, but they're going to
get it done.
City Attorney Penman asked if it would be more than 45 days.
The Chief stated that his time frame for getting this done was August 22.
Council Member/Commissioner McCammack asked the Chief whether he had
any idea, since we garner less than 10 percent of the total County's population,
why it is that we have 35 percent of the total licensed facilities?
The Chief stated that he thought that most of the treatment facilities that have
been licensed from the State have opened up shop in San Bernardino to attend to
the population that is here.
She asked the Chief whether he was aware that, according to the maps that had
been printed out by Information Technology, there were actually registered sex
offenders living within half a block of many schools in our community-for
instance, there was a registered sex offender within half of a block of Clare
Cherry .
36
08/0612007
Chief Billdt acknowledged that, in fact, he and the City Attorney had discussed
that earlier this week with regard to the requirements of PC 290, and also two
laws on the books that have to be considered-Megan's Law and Jessica's Law.
He stated that Jessica's Law is the most recent law that has to do with serious
sexual, habitual offenders. However, that law is tied up in the appellate court
right now because the courts are trying to determine its application and
enforcement of it. He explained that the issue is whether or not it is retroactive
to all 290 registrants, or whether it's only for those that are registrants in the
future; and until the courts decide, it's difficult to enforce because one of the
partners that has to enforce it with us is State Parole.
Council Member/Commissioner Estrada clarified that because they have to
register as a sex offender for life, theoretically somebody could be on the list
who was a sex offender and did his time 20 years ago; and he would continue to
be on the list for the next 20 or 30 years.
Chief Billdt stated that was correct-that any person that is a sex registrant,
could have been convicted decades ago, and as long a they live in the city they
will remain on the list.
Mayor/Chairman Morris stated that his recommendation would be that they
move with dispatch to enact this moratorium and they would have a report from
the Police Chief and all the data they need to make an intelligent decision by the
23rd of August.
Council Member/Commissioner McCarmnack made a motion, seconded by
Council Member/Commissioner Derry, that said urgency ordinance be adopted.
(Note: The vote was taken following further discussion and public comments.)
Council Member/Commissioner Estrada stated that given everything that had
been said, she wanted to hear from the Mayor exactly where he stood on this
issue at this point.
Mayor/Chairman Morris answered that he believed they ought to move to do
exactly what was recommended. He stated that he thought the 45 days was
excessive given the need for this action and given the information that we have
from our own work in the City Attorney's office for the last five months and the
information they have from colleagues across the state who have done this years
in advance of us.
Ms. Estrada then asked the Mayor directly what his recommendation would be.
Mayor/Chairman Morris stated, "My recommendation is that we adopt the
moratorium and move as quickly as possible to enact a piece of legislation here
37
08/0612007
that will give us what we need by way of the protection that other cities have
that we don't have. .
Council Member/Commissioner Brinker pointed out that even if they did have
45 days, nothing prohibits them from acting quicker than that and putting
something in place before the 45 days is up. Secondly, he noted that he had a
large number of constituents present who had been waiting very patiently and
wanted to speak. He stated that he wanted to hear from them because he knew
they had some very important concerns to share; and he requested that their
comments be heard prior to the vote being taken.
Ruben Lopez, 2648 Valencia Avenue, San Bernardino, CA, suggested that the
Mayor work with the City Attorney so they could come to some kind of
conclusion prior to the Council meetings. He stated that residents in his
neighborhood used Jessica's Law to remove a sex offender from their
neighborhood and we all need to protect our kids.
Roy Ferguson, 288 East 47'" Street, San Bernardino, CA, stated that two years
ago they had five sex offenders in their neighborhood and Mr. Penman worked
with them to get them out.
Joe Ortiz, 387 West 25th Street, San Bernardino, CA, stated that about 7/10 of a
mile above Tom Minor Park there is a house for sale and the real estate ad in
front of the home states that the home is being sold as an adult care facility,
complete with two beds for each bedroom. He stated that the company was
from Covina and the ad stated that six patients could occupy the house. He
expressed concern that these people could end up being parolees.
Jay Lindberg, 6340 Orange Knoll, San Bernardino, CA, spoke regarding the
parolee issue and asked what do you do with these individuals-that the jails are
running out of space and they have to go somewhere. He stated that there are
1,000 families that will be losing their homes within the next three months here
in San Bernardino; and the Council's focus is on the wrong thing and not to the
best interest of the citizens.
Eusebia Albarado, 1335 West King Street, San Bernardino, CA, stated that she
has seven children and they are surrounded by these homes with druggies and
sex offenders. She stated she is scared and wants something done about it.
Jose Sanchez asked for help in moving these unsavory individuals out of the
neighborhood on King Street.
38
08/06/2007
Mary Cortez, 1365 West King Street, San Bernardino, CA, stated she has lived
at this location for 31 years. She stated that 1331 is a small two-bedroom home
with a studio in the back and that sex offenders are living there, with more on
the other side; and the kids in the neighborhood are living in fear. ..
David Rubalcava, 1353 West King Street, San Bernardino, CA, stated he has
lived in the neighborhood for over 36 years and the block has always been
family oriented and kids have always been able to play outside. He stated that
there are four residents on King Street that house 15 sex offenders. He stated
that these individuals are active at all hours of the day and night and he is fearful
of leaving his family when he goes to work. He urged the Mayor and Council
to do something regarding this matter and to quit playing the blame game among
themselves.
Ralph Affaitati, 5398 North Leroy Street, San Bernardino, CA, stated that he
had learned that the city of Newport Beach had an ordinance that was in place
and was working relative to this matter. He obtained a copy from Newport
Beach's city attorney and then sent a copy to a prime City of San Bernardino
administrator, who said he would forward it to the Mayor's office. He also told
this administrator that he was also going to send a copy to Council Member
McCammack's office, since she was so involved in this issue.
Mr. Affaitati stated that he hoped the Mayor would get together with the City
Attorney and work on something that other cities have done. He stated that the
State of California is going to have an incredible release of numerous parolees,
and we have to be ready for it.
Mayor/Chairman Morris informed Mr. Affaitati that he had not received any
information from anyone about the Newport Beach ordinance. He stated that
the first time he saw it was on Wednesday of last week when it was hand carried
to him by the City Attorney.
David McCammack, 634 East Parkdale Drive, San Bernardino, CA, spoke
regarding the large number of signs placed on utility and street name poles
throughout San Bernardino. He stated that we are bringing in a cottage industry
to our City by individuals who are buying up foreclosures and setting up parolee
houses. He noted that all the signs are illegal and that Code Enforcement should
be taking them down and fining these individuals.
David Hanes, 2048 West Lincoln Avenue, San Bernardino, CA, a partner with
Turrill Transitional Assistance Program, stated that they run the three houses on
King Street and they are not eligible to apply for a license because they have six
people or less in each residence, and a license is not required. He stated that
whether we like it or not, parolees have to come home, and sex offenders have
39
08/06/2007
to come home unless they are given a life sentence, and the community has to
deal with these individuals. He stated that they are a nonprofit corporation-that
they don't own any property, they don't buy any properties, and they are not
amassing any money-that they charge $350 per month for these parolees to live
with them. He stated that they do the best that they can, but they need help
from the State and from the City and from the County-that these people have to
be someplace.
He noted that Mr. Penman had claimed that he had shut the house down on 481h
Street, but he did not shut that house down-they won that court battle. He
stated that the judge would not give Mr. Penman the injunction-that they had
moved out on their own because they didn't want trouble-but the judgment was
in their favor. Insofar as the 305 parolees that are absconding right now, that is
what their program is trying to stop; and that the State would be bringing in
people to help find them. He stated that he would rather have these people in a
home where they are monitored and have to sign in and out, and where parole
agents come over almost daily to monitor the parolees.
Mr. Hanes also stated that we can't go after these people with code violations-
it is illegal. We can't pick out a house and say, we're going to check that house
for violations and close it down if it has violations-we can't do that. We need
regulations, and he thinks the Mayor is right when he says that we need to put
something together and regulate how these houses work and how many can be in
a certain neighborhood and what neighborhoods. According to Mr. Hanes, the
houses on King Street meet the requirements of Jessica's Law and Megan's
Law; and the reason they are there is because there are so few places left where
parolees that are sex offenders can live-that if you take a map and you make a
circle around all the schools and all the parks of a half mile radius you will see
that there are not many places left in the city where they can live, and they have
to live somewhere.
Tom Kanavos, 1962 Turrill Avenue, San Bernardino, CA, stated that he was
President and CEO of Turrill Transitional. He stated that Turrill Transitional
Assistance Program is not parolee housing-they are sober livings, which
require no permitting by the State. He stated that they do random drug and
alcohol testing; and they provide transportation to and from church functions
and l2-step meetings, as well as job interviews and to and from work. They
help the clients get ID and Social Security cards so that they are prepared to
work. Their curriculum consists of Tuesday, a bible study at the Tenth Street
house; Wednesday, they take them to a l2-step Narcotics Anonymous meeting;
Thursday, a bible study at the King Street facility; Friday, a 12-step meeting;
and on Sunday, breakfast and church-that's what they do.
Mr. Kanavos advised that being a 501C(3) they are able to provide some food
for all of these houses. They are a structured program inasmuch as they provide
40
08/0612007
jobs and/or interviews for almost 30 of their clients in different locations. He
advised that according to the Department of lustice (D01), nearly 85 percent of
parolees have substance abuse problems. In San Bernardino the 001 reports
30-50 percent of all parolees are homeless. He stated that Turrill Transitional
does feel that there have been opportunistic investors who damage the reputation
of sober livings in general by not supervising the residents, by not offering any
curriculum designed to help the parolee back into society, and by not
communicating with the parolees' parole agents to effect positive re-entry into
society .
Council Member/Commissioner Kelley, speaking from the podium, provided his
address-5066 North Varsity, San Bernardino, CA-stating that he was a father
of four children in this city; and like many other families in this city he was
trying to raise his children in family-friendly neighborhoods. He stated that he
was so disappointed that he had to come before this dais to speak-to ask a
question-and he noted that he only had a very short amount of time because the
City Clerk would cut him off.
Mr. Kelley addressed Mr. Hanes and asked him if he had added on to the
facility, as one of the residents had said.
(Note: Although someone spoke from the back of the ronm, the recording
deputy city clerk was unable to see who was speaking or to hear and understand
the remarks being made.)
Mayor/Chairman Morris reminded Mr. Kelley that this was his time to address
the Council, and if he wanted to engage this individual in a conversation he
could do so privately.
Council Member/Commissioner Kelley answered that he had a concern that he
would like to bring to the attention of the Mayor and Council; and the Mayor
told him to go ahead.
Mr. Kelley stated that he would like the Mayor and Common Council to
immediately investigate the lady who said that there was an add-on to that
house-that it could endanger the lives and well-being of the residents because
they cannot get a fire truck through. He stated that there was a requirement in
this City-a City code-and that was what he was trying to understand-he was
not coming down on the house-he wanted to know whether they were
endangering the lives and safety of the structures next to them because fire
personnel possibly could not get a fIre truck through. He reiterated that he
would like the Mayor and Common Council to immediately go out there and
investigate whether there is adequate space/distance to protect adjacent
properties and lives.
41
08/06/2007
Council Member/Commissioner Brinker stated that he had the opportunity to
visit our local parole office and see an intake meeting for about 40-45 parolees.
He had a chance to talk with some of the parole staff and find out what it is that
they do and what we are dealing with.
About 30-50 percent of them are homeless; and about 80-85 percent of them are
addicted to some sort of substance. He saw a lot of nonprofit agencies-mostly
churches-reaching out to minister to these people.
Mr. Brinker stated that he believed Mr. Kanavos' or Mr. Hanes' agency was
gaming the system and playing games with the law. They made a law to limit it
to six or less for a reason, and so to create a property that has multiple
residences, if you even want to call them that, and then put 15 people there, is
really disingenuous; and to call it a sober living facility instead of a parolee half-
way house is also disingenuous.
Mr. Brinker went on to say that he agrees with the Mayor. He stated that he is
on the Legislative Review Committee, and he wants this to come before the
committee and take action.
The motion made by Council Member/Commissioner McCammack, seconded
by Council Member/Commissioner Derry, that said urgency ordinance be
adopted, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members/
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
42. An Ordinance of the City of San Bernardino repealing Chapter 8.35 to Title
8 of the San Bernardino Municipal Code, that any vehicle used to solicit an
act of prostitution or to acquire or attempt to acquire a controlled substance
is a nuisance subject to seizure and impoundment. FIRST READING
City Attorney Penman stated that this was a case where the Court of Appeal in
July 2000 ruled that this ordinance was constitutional, that decision was recently
overturned by the State Supreme Court, and just today his office learned that the
City of Stockton was asking for a rehearing. He stated that he did not think the
Supreme Court would rehear this matter, but they might; therefore, he was
recommending that this matter be continued to the next meeting.
Council Member/Commissioner Estrada made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Baxter, that the matter be continued to the
Council/Commission meeting of August 20,2007.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Derry ,
Council Members/
Kelley, Johnson,
42
08/0612007
COMMUNITY DEVEWPMENT COMMISSION
Staff Present: Mayor/Chairman Morris; Council Members/Commissioners Estrada,
Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson, McCammack; Economic Development
Agency Executive Director Pacheco and Special Counsel Saba, City Clerk Clark.
Absent: None.
R43. RES. CDC/2007-24A - Resolution of the Community Development
Commi"sion of the City of San Bernardino approving and authorizing the
Executive Director of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of San
Bernardino ("Agency") to execute (1) a Redevelopment Cooperation
Agreement by and between the Agency and Inland Valley Development
Agency ("IVDA") and (2) a Redevelopment Project Study Agreement by
and between the Agency and Street-Manchester, LLC (Fairway Homes
Project - IVDA Redevelopment Project Area).
Council Member/Commissioner Johnson stated that Bonnie Johnson, who is his
employer as well as his aunt, owns property in this area; therefore, he would
abstain on this item. He left the Council Chambers and returned after the vote
was taken.
Maggie Pacheco, Executive Director, Economic Development Agency, advised
that this study agreement would simply give the Agency the opportunity to work
with Street-Manchester to look at the possible expansion of that residential
development-that there was no financial obligation or commitment on the part
of the Agency other than to work with Street-Manchester to see if what we are
referring to as Project No.2 option is possible.
Ms. Pacheco stated that the matter was discussed at length at Redevelopment
Committee, however, they did not have a recommendation from the Committee.
She stated that Council Member/Commissioner Estrada did indicate that she was
desirous of ensuring that there was a time frame for performance for this
particular agreement; therefore, she wanted to point out that in the study
agreement they had actually added a schedule for performance on page 8, which
specifically deals with the various actions that need to take place during the
course of this agreement; and it is very specific so that they are able to track the
activity of the proposed development.
Council Member/Commissioner Brinker made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Derry, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. CDC/2007-24A was adopted by the following vote: Ayes:
Council Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley.
43
08/06/2007
Nays: Council Member/Commissioner McCammack. Abstentions: Council
Member/Commissioner Johnson. Absent: None.
R44. RES. CDC/2007-2S - Resolution of the Community Development
Commission of the City of San Bernardino approving and authorizing the
Executive Director of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of San
Bernardino ("Agency") to execute a Demolition Contract by and between
the Agency and Dakeno, Inc. for the demolition of Agency properties
located at 768, 720, 734 and 740 West 4th Street and 755 West ~ Street,
San Bernardino (Downtown Mixed-Use Project - Central City North
Redevelopment Project Area).
Council Member/Commissioner Estrada made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Baxter, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. CDC/2007-25 was adopted by the following vote:
Council Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry,
Johnson. Nays: Council Member/Commissioner McCammack.
None.
Ayes:
Kelley,
Absent:
45. Public hearing - Resolution ordering the vacation of an east-west alley,
northerly of Little League Drive and east of Magnolia Avenue
RES. 2007-335 - Resolution of the City of San Bernardino ordering the
vacation of an east-west alley, northerly of Little League Drive and east of
Magnolia Avenue.
Mayor/Chairman Morris opened the hearing.
Valerie Ross, Director of Development Services, explained that this is really a
paper street that does not actua1ly exist in real life. She stated that it was not
needed for circulation purposes and there was no opposition from the adjoining
property owner, who happens to be the same person.
No public comments were received.
Council Member/Commissioner Kelley made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Baxter, that the hearing be closed; that the Findings of
Fact, as set forth in the staff report from the Director of Development Services,
dated July 9, 2007, as to why the east-west alley, northerly of Little League
Drive and east of Magnolia Avenue is no longer necessary for public street
purposes, be adopted; and that said resolution be adopted.
44
08/06/2007
The motion carried and Resolution No. 2007-335 was adopted by the following
vote: Ayes: Council Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
Derry, Kelley, Johnson, McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
46. Public Comments
Jay Lindberg, 6340 Orange Knoll, San Bernardino, CA, shared a new speech
with the Mayor and Council regarding OUT New Reality.
David McCammack, 634 East Parkdale Drive, San Bernardino, CA, spoke
regarding the signs posted allover town on the utility poles, stating that the City
needs to enforce the laws that it has, and Code Enforcement personnel need to
get our there and do their jobs.
Bridgette Washington, 433 North Sierra Way, San Bernardino, CA, with San
Bernardino Public Employees' Association, expressed her concern regarding
two employees with 20 years of combined service, who are semi-skilled and
work in the Refuse Department and are at risk of having their jobs contracted
out. She stated she wanted to bring this to the Mayor and Council's attention
before the matter comes before them at their next meeting.
Joe Ortiz, 387 West 25th Street, San Bernardino, CA, spoke regarding the
Mayor's political agenda, stating that what he wants is a kangaroo court. He
urged the public to beware of any candidates backed by the Mayor and his three
compadres.
Reverend Vines, 2662 North "E" Street, San Bernardino, CA, representing the
San Bernardino Valley Community Development Corporation, stated that five
months ago the corporation began working with Parks and Recreation to put in
the garden at Anne Shirrells Park and they still don't have a Letter of
Agreement regarding the work they are doing.
Marilyn Alcantar, 1495 Kingman Street, San Bernardino, CA, spoke regarding
the semi trucks coming through her neighborhood. She stated that signs are
posted stating that there are alternate routes, and she asked what the City could
do to keep these trucks from coming onto their streets-that it is especially
problematic on the weekends.
Mayor/Chairman Morris asked her to speak with the City Manager.
Paul Sanborn, 3559 Genevieve, San Bernardino, CA, stated that a major
catastrophe was about to happen-that on the west side of the Mountain View
Cemetery they are going to block off 17 streets and pull the asphalt off and sell
the property as graves. Then they will repeat the process on the east side of the
cemetery .
45
08/06/2007
Roy Ferguson, 288 East 47lh Street, San Bernardino, CA, spoke regarding the
problem of signs on the utility poles allover San Bernardino. He suggested
printing the yard sale and sign ordinances in both Spanish and English and
mailing them out with the water bills, and implementation of a $50-100 fine.
Carmen Nevarez, 7075 Osbun Road, San Bernardino, CA, spoke regarding the
"goings-on" at the Council meeting and about a ticket she received about eight
months ago that is still in "consideration" by the City. She appealed to the
Mayor and Council to forfeit the fine because nothing has been done during all
these months and it has been very stressful to her.
Mayor Morris indicated that the City Manager was taking her information and
would be investigating the matter.
Charles Greenwood, San Bernardino, CA, an employee in the Refuse
Department, stated that the bickering needs to stop. He stated that a lot of
things are going on in Refuse that need to be looked at; and that in Refuse and
during the Council meetings it appears that everybody is doing whatever they
feel like doing, when they should be working together.
47. Acljournment
At 8:19 p.m., the meeting adjourned to 5:00 p.m., on Monday, August 13,
2007, in the Economic Development Agency Boardroom, 201 North "E" Street,
to discuss the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The next joint regular
meeting of the Mayor and Common Council/Community Development
Commission is scheduled for 1:30 p.m., Monday, August 20, 2007, in the
Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino,
California.
No. of Items: 47
RACHEL G. CLARK
~ity Clerk
By: . t>.W
Linda E. Hartzel
Deputy City Clerk
No. of Hours: 6.75
46
08/06/2007
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
300 N. "D" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Website: www.sbcity.org
Mayor Potrli:k J. Morris
Coullcil M.mbers:
Esther EstradtJ
D.llIIis J. Boxter
Tobill Brinker
Neil Derry
Chas Kelley
RikJr.e VOII Johnsoll
Wendy McComnull:k
MINUTES
MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL AND
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
JOINT REGULAR MEETING
OCTOBER I, 2007
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
The joint regular meeting of the Mayor and Common Council and Community
Development Commission of the City of San Bernardino was called to order by
Mayor/Chairman Morris at 1:34 p.m., Monday, October I, 2007, in the Council
Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California.
Roll Call
Roll call was taken by City Clerk Clark with the following being present:
Mayor/Chairman Morris; Council Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
Derry, Johnson, McCammack; City Attorney Penman, City Clerk Clark, City Manager
Wilson. Absent: Council Member/Commissioner Kelley.
Council Member/Comm;u(oner Kelley Arrived
At 2:03 p.m., Council Member!Commissioner Kelley arrived at the Council!
Commission meeting.
1. Closed Session
A. Conference with legal counsel - existing litigation - pursuant to
Government Code Section 54956.9(a):
Ollie Dean Harris v. City of San Bernardino - San Bernardino Superior
Court Case No. 143684;
Michael Negrete v. City of San Bernardino - United States District
Court Case No. EDCV 06-01047 V AP (OPX);
1
10/01/2007
Kimberly Smith v. City of San Bernardino - San Bernardino Superior
Court Case No. SCVSS 139188.
B. Conference with legal counsel - anticipated litigation - significant
exposure to litigation - pursuant to subdivision (b) (1), (2), (3) (A-F) of
Government Code Section 54956.9:
James Black - Disability Evaluation Unit Rating No. SBR G25129
C. Conference with legal counsel - anticipated litigation - initiation of
litigation - pursuant to subdivision (c) of Government Code Section
54956.9.
D. Closed Session - personnel - pursuant to Government Code Section
54957.
E. Closed session with Chief of Police on matters posing a threat to the
security of public buildings or threat to the public's right of access to
public services or public facilities - pursuant to Government Code
Section 54957.
F. Conference with labor negotiator - pursuant to Government Code
Section 54957.6:
Ne~otiator:
Linn Livingston, Human Resources Director
Employee Or~anizations:
Fire Fighters Association Local No. 891
San Bernardino Confidential Management Association
Mid-Management Unit
General Unit
G. Conference with real property negotiator - pursuant to Government Code
Section 54956.8.
Reading of Resolutions & Ordinances
Deputy City Clerk Hartzel read into the record the titles of all the resolutions and
ordinances on the regular agenda of the Mayor and Common Council and Community
Development Commission.
InvocationIPledge of Allegiance
The invocation was given by Reverend David Starr, Pastor of St. John's Episcopal
Church, followed by the pledge of allegiance, led by Council Member Dennis Baxter.
2
10/01/2007
Moment of Silence
Mayor Morris extended condolences to the family and requested a moment of silence in
memory of Clifford Brown, who recently passed away and served as a deacon of
Bethesda Baptist Church.
2. Appointments
Re-Appointments - Council Member Brinker
. Jerry A. Moya - Board of Fire Commissioners
. Jane Messer - Fine Arts Commission
. Willie M. Brue - Senior Affairs Commission
. James J. Eble - Board of Building Commissioners
Appointments - Mayor Morris
. Suzie Earp - Historical Preservation Commission
. Cherstin M. Lyon - Historical Preservation Commission
Council Member/Commissioner Estrada made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Baxter, that the re-appointments of Jerry Moya, Jane
Messer, Willie Brue, and James Eble, as requested by Council Member
Brinker, and the appointments of Suzie Earp and Cherstin Lyon, as requested by
Mayor Morris, be approved.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Derry,
Council Members/
Kelley, Johnson,
3. Proclamations & Presentations
County Supervisor Josie Gonzales presented a check in the amount of $15,000
to Mr. Art Solis, President of the Inland Empire Pony League.
Wayne Austin, President and CEO of the San Bernardino Convention and
Visitors Bureau, provided a report on this year's Route 66 Rendezvous and
presented a check in the amount of $3,437 to the Boys and Girls Club.
Mayor Morris and Assistant to the Mayor Nick Gonzales acknowledged the
following residents and businesses who participated in the City-wide cleanup in
preparation for the Route 66 Rendezvous:
. Home Depot for donating $3,300 worth of tools;
. Caltrans personnel, who gave the City access to the freeways and spent
six weeks working with City personnel in the cleanup of the freeways
and the freeway on- and off-ramps;
3
1 % 1/2007
. Deputy Dye from Glen Helen, whose workers contributed over 3,390
hours of work, equating to $35,000;
· Youth from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints;
· Neighborhood Cluster Associations & Neighborhood Watch Groups;
· Public Safety Academy;
. Los Padrinos.
Henry Duro, Chairman of the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, Jerry
Paresa, Executive Director of Intergovernmental Affairs, and Mike Smith, San
Manuel Fire Chief, presented a check for $2.2 million to Mayor Morris and
Fire Chief Michael Conrad to be used to purchase two new, fully-equipped
ladder trucks and fund two new positions-a dispatcher and a mechanic.
4. Announcements
Announcements were made by the Mayor, members of the Common Council,
elected officials, and a representative from the Chamber of Commerce regarding
various civic, community, and chamber events and activities.
5. Waive fun reading of resolutions and ordinances
Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Baxter, that full reading of the resolutions and
ordinances on the regular agenda of the Mayor and Common Council and
Community Development Commission, be waived.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Derry,
Council Members/
Kelley, Johnson,
6. Council Minutes
Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Baxter, that the minutes of the following meeting(s) of
the Mayor and Common Council/Community Development Commission of the
City of San Bernardino, be approved as submitted in typewritten form: July 16,
2007; August 13, 2007.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Derry ,
Council Members/
Kelley, Johnson,
4
1 % 1/2007
7. Claims and Payroll
Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Baxter, that the claims and payroll and the authorization
to issue warrants as listed in the memorandum dated September 13, 2007, from
Barbara Pachon, Director of Finance, be approved.
The motion carried by the foIJowing vote:
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Derry ,
Council Members/
KeIJey, Johnson,
8. Personnel Actions
Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Baxter, that the personnel actions, as submitted by the
Chief Examiner, dated September 26, 2007 in accordance with Civil Service
rules and Personnel policies adopted by the Mayor and Common Council of the
City of San Bernardino, be approved and ratified.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Derry ,
Council Members/
KeIJey, Johnson,
9. RES. 2007-406 . Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City
of San Bernardino authorizing the City Manager to execute a lease
agreement between the City of San Bernardino and Omnipoint
Communications Inc. for the lease of three hundred ten (310) square feet of
land at Colony Park, located at the intersection of E. Harwick Drive and
Weir Road.
Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Baxter, that said resolution be adopted; and that the
Director of Finance be authorized to amend the FY 2007/08 adopted budget and
increase General Fund revenues by $12,000 (Account No. 001-000-4520 "Land
& Building Rental") and also increase the Parks and Recreation expenditure
budget in a corresponding amount of $12,000 (Account No. 001-382-5706-7756
"Colony Park Picnic Shelter PR08-11 ").
The motion carried and Resolution No. 2007-406 was adopted by the foIJowing
vote: Ayes: Council Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
Derry, KeIJey, Johnson, McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
5
10/01/2007
10. RES. 2007-407 - Resolution of the City of San Bernardino authorizing
execution of a Cooperative Agreement with the San Bernardino County
Flood Control District and the City of Colton for construction of Randall
Basin (SD08-03).
Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Baxter, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. 2007-407 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
11. RES. 2007-412 - Resolution of the City of San Bernardino adopting the
Three-Year Capital Improvement Program (2007-2010) for Measure "I"
Local Expenditures.
Mayor/Chairman Morris explained that due to potential conflicts of interest
which require certain Council members to recuse themselves from voting on
Measure "I" Capital Improvement Projects located within 500 feet of real
property which they own, or in which they have an interest, there would be two
separate actions to approve the resolution.
He indicated that all members of the Council would participate in the fIrst vote
to approve the resolution and those projects listed on Exhibits A and B. On the
second vote, Council Members Baxter and Brinker would leave the Chambers,
and the remaining members would vote on Exhibit C-those projects which
present a conflict to Mr. Baxter and Mr. Brinker.
Council Member/Commissioner Kelley made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Brinker, that said resolution be adopted with Exhibits A
and B.
Resolution No. 2007-412 and Exhibits A and B were adopted by the following
vote: Ayes: Council Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
Derry, Kelley, Johnson, McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Council Member/Commissioner Baxter stated that because he owns or has an
interest in real property located within 500 feet of CIP No. 8804-116, he would
abstain on the next motion. He left the Council Chambers and returned after the
vote was taken.
6
10/01/2007
Council Member/Commissioner Brinker stated that because he owns or has an
interest in real property located within 500 feet of CIP No. SS06-102, he would
abstain on the next motion. He left the Council Chambers and returned after the
vote was taken.
Council Member/Commissioner Kelley made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Estrada, that Exhibit C to the resolution be adopted.
The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members/
Commissioners Estrada, Derry, Kelley, Johnson, McCammack. Nays: None.
Abstentions: Council Members/Commissioners Baxter, Brinker. Absent:
None.
12. RES. 2007-413 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City
of San Bernardino approving Amendment No. 1 to Agreement with GFR
Enterprises, Inc. for the dedication and improvement of a 4-acre park at
the southwest comer of Irvington Avenue and Chestnut Avenue.
Council Member/Commissioner Kelley made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Estrada, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. 2007-413 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Kelley, Johnson, McCammack.
Nays: None. Absent: Council Members/Commissioners Brinker, Derry.
13. Authorization to proceed and approval of Plan No. 12291 - proposed
vacation of a portion of Crescent Avenue between Huff Street and College
Drive
Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Baxter, that the Director of Development Services and
the City Clerk be authorized to proceed with the proposed vacation of a ponion
of Crescent Avenue between Huff Street and College Drive; and that Plan No.
12291 showing the proposed vacation of a ponion of Crescent Avenue between
Huff Street and College Drive, be approved.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Derry ,
Council Members/
Kelley, Johnson,
14. Set public hearing for adoption of Master Facilities Plan Regional
Circulation System Update to adjust the Regional Traffic Systems Fee and
Amendment to Resolution No. 2006-97
7
10/01/2007
Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Baxter, that the Mayor and Common Council set a
public hearing for October 15, 2007, at 4:00 p.m. to adopt the updated Master
Facilities Plan Regional Circulation System and set the new amount of the
Regional Circulation System Development Impact Fee.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Derry ,
Council Members/
Kelley, Johnson,
15. Reject all bids for Sewer Improvements in Industrial Parkway (SWOS-05),
Tippecanoe Avenue (SW05-06) and "I" Street (SW04-36) & Pavement
Rehabilitation of Tippecanoe Avenue (SWOS-06), "I" Street (SW04-36) and
Sterling Avenue (S806-56), per Plan No. 11923
Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Baxter, that the Mayor and Common Council reject all
bids for Sewer Improvements in Industrial Parkway (SW05-Q5), Tippecanoe
Avenue (SW05-06) and "I" Street (SW04-36) & Pavement Rehabilitation on
Tippecanoe Avenue (SW05-06), "I" Street (SW04-36) and Sterling Avenue
(SS06-56), per Plan No. 11923.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Derry ,
Council Members/
Kelley, Johnson,
16. Resolution authorizing an agreement with MuniServices, LLC to provide
analysis and audit services for the Transactions and Use Tax coUected by
the State Board of EqIlA1i7.ation & a Resolution authorizing a designated
representative to receive the Transactions and Use Tax records from the
State Board of Equalization and rescinding Resolution No. 87-130.
Resolution of the City of San Bernardino authorizing the execution of an
agreement with MuniServices, LLC to provide analysis and audit services
for the City of San Bernardino's Transactions and Use Tax coUected by the
State Board of Equalization. (16A)
RES. 2007-414 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City
of San Bernardino designating MuniServices, LLC as the authorized City
representative to examine transactions (sales) and use tax records, and
designating the City Manager, the Director of Finance and the Deputy
Director of Finance as the City Officers authorized to receive information
contained in, or derived from, the Transactions (sales) and Use Tax
records, and rescinding Resolution 87-130. (168)
8
10/01/2007
Council Member/Commissioner McCammack pointed out that Progressive
Solutions, a company already under contract to the City, has a module that does
almost the same thing as MuniServices was proposing to do; and Progressive
currently charges the City only half of what MuniServices is proposing to
charge. She stated that she thought this proposed contract would be a
duplication of some of the services we are already paying for; therefore, staff
should first check with Progressive to see if they could provide this same
service .
City Manager Wilson answered that MuniServices has been auditing the City's
records since 1987 and has done an excellent job at auditing sales tax services.
He stated that their client list probably runs about 200 cities in California. As to
whether or not Progressive, with the help of the Finance Director, could do the
same thing-it was his opinion that the audit work associated with sales tax is
fairly complicated, involving not only the point of sale transactions, but also the
issue of how sales tax is allocated within that pool.
Mayor/Chairman Morris asked whether it would be helpful to make an inquiry
as to what services Progressive could provide and take this matter off the
calendar for today until staff had obtained that information.
City Manager Wilson suggested that the Council adopt Resolution B today and
continue Resolution A to the next meeting.
Council Member/Commissioner Kelley made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Estrada, that said resolution A, be continued to the
Council/Commission meeting of October 15,2007.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Derry ,
Council Members/
Kelley, Johnson,
Council Member/Commissioner Baxter made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Kelley, that said resolution B, be adopted.
Resolution No. 2007-414 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
17. Establish salaries - Police Department ranges P-l, P-2, P-3, and Law
Enforcement Trainee, effective August 1, 2007
9
10/01/2007
Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Baxter, that the salaries for Police Department Ranges
P-l (Police Officer), P-2 (Detective/Corporal), P-3 (Sergeant) and Law
Enforcement Trainee be established, effective August I, 2007; that the Human
Resources Department be authorized to amend Resolution No. 6429 to reflect
the above action; and that the Director of Finance be authorized to amend the
FY 2007/08 budget by increasing the Police Department General Fund budget
for Charter 186 costs by transferring $923,700 from the General Government
budget into Account No. 001-092-5011 and also make the appropriate
adjustments to the various Police Grants as allowed by the Grants for the
Charter 186 costs.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Derry,
Council Members/
Kelley, Johnson,
18. RES. 2007-408 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City
of San Bernardino authorizing the issuance of annual purchase orders in an
amount not to exceed $108,889 in the aggregate to purchase food from
Sysco Foods, Merit Day, Ross Swiss and Second Harvest Food Bank for the
Senior Nutrition Program for FY 2007/08 through FY 2009/10.
Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Baxter, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. 2007-408 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
19. Item Deleted
20. RES. 2007-409 - Resolution authorizing the execution of an agreement and
issuance of a purchase order in the amount of $61,482.57 to Fairview Ford
of San Bernardino pursuant to Section 3.04.010-83 of the Municipal Code
for the purchase of (3) three 2008 Ford F-250 pick up trucks with liftgates,
to be utilized by the Parks and Police Departments.
Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Baxter, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. 2007-409 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
10
10/01/2007
21. RES. 2007-410 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City
of San Bernardino authorizing the execution of a purchase order in the
amount of $245,300.00 by exercising its fU'St year option with Pavement
Recycling Systems, Inc., pursuant to Section 3.04.010 B-3 of the Municipal
Code for cold planing services, labor and equipment rental for City street
repairs and ratifying action taken from July 1, 2007 through approval by
the Mayor and Common Council.
Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Baxter, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. 2007-410 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
22. RES. 2007-411 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City
of San Bernardino authorizing the execution of a purchase order in the
amount of $1,586,560.00 by exercising its fmal contract option between the
City of San Bernardino and Matich Corporation pursuant to Section
3.04.010 B-3 of the Municipal Code for street paving services utilized by the
Public Services Department, Streets Division.
Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Baxter, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. 2007-411 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
23. Request for Civic and Promotional funding for the Fiesta de la Familia at
Arrowhead Credit Union Park
Council Member/Commissioner Estrada made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Derry, that the request for a waiver of fees in the
amount of $12,580.74 for department personnel costs associated with the 10"
Annual Fiesta de la Familia scheduled for October 20-21, 2007, be approved;
and that $12,580.74 be transferred from the Civic and Promotional fund into the
Police Department account to recover their costs incurred for the Fiesta de la
Familia event.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Derry ,
Council Members/
Kelley, Johnson,
11
10/01/2007
24. Public bearing - Resolution authorizing the execution of an Agreement and
ResOlution Ordering Work relative to proposed Cajon Boulevard and
University Parkway Area Landscape Maintenance Assessment District No.
1057 (parcel Map No. 17375) (Continued from September 17,2007)
Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San
Bernardino authorizing and directing the execution of a Landscape
Maintenance Services Agreement relative to the proposed Assessment
District No. 1057 (Cajon Boulevard and University Parkway Area
Landscape Maintenance Assessment District). (24A)
Resolution of the City of San Bernardino rmding and determining the
existence of less than a majority protest, that ballots submitted in favor of
the assessment exceed the ballots submitted in opposition to the assessment
and that the public convenience and necessity require the maintenance of
landscaping in the Cajon Boulevard and University Parkway area,
approving the rmai Engineer's Report, creating an assessment district to
cover the costs of said maintenance, known as Assessment District No. 1057,
ordering the work, confirming the 2008-2009 Assessment Ron, and
determining that the SpeclaI Assessment Investigation, Limitation and
Majority Protest Act of 1931 shall not apply. (24B)
Note: The resolutions were not distributed with the backup materials.
The hearing remained open.
Mayor/Chairman Morris advised that staff had requested a continuance to
October 15,2007.
Council Member/Commissioner Baxter made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Johnson, that the matter be continued to the
Council/Commission meeting of October 15, 2007.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Derry .
Council Members/
Kelley, Johnson,
25. Public hearing - Resolution authorizing the execution of an Agreement and
Resolution Ordering Work relative to the proposed Central Avenue and
Lena Road Area Landscape Maintenance Assessment District No. 1063
(Parcel Map No. 17721)
12
10/01/2007
Resolution of the Mayor and Common Councll of the City of San
Bernardino authorizing and directing the execution of a Landscape
Maintenance Services Agreement relative to the proposed Assessment
District No. 1063 (Central Avenue and Lena Road Area Landscape
Maintenance Assessment District). (25A)
Resolution of the City of San Bernardino rIDding and determining the
existence of less than a llU\iority protest, that ballots submitted in favor of
the assessment exceed the ballots submitted in opposition to the assessment
and that the public convenience and necessity require the maintenance of
landscaping in the Central Avenue and Lena Road Area, approving the
final Engineer's Report, creating an assessment district to cover the costs of
said maintenance, known as Assessment District No. 1063, ordering the
work, confirming the 2008-2009 Assessment Roll, and determining that the
Special Assessment Investigation, Limitation and Majority Protest Act of
1931 shall not apply. (258)
Note: The resolutions were not distributed with the backup materials.
Mayor/Chairman Morris opened the hearing.
Mayor/Chairman Morris advised that staff was requesting a continuance of this
matter to October 15, 2007.
Council Member/Commissioner Baxter made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Estrada, that the matter be continued to the Council/
Commission meeting of October 15, 2007.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Derry ,
Council Members/
Kelley, Johnson,
26. Public hearing - Resolution Ordering Work - 48th Street and Little
Mountain Drive Area Landscape Maintenance Assessment District No. 1065
(Tract No. 17038)
RES. 2007-415 - Resolution of the City of San Bernardino finding and
determining the existence of less than a llU\iority protest, that ballots
submitted in favor of the assessment exceed the ballots submitted in
opposition to the assessment and that the public convenience and necessity
require the maintenance of landscaping in the 48th Street and Little
Mountain Drive Area, approving the rmal Engineer's Report, creating an
assessment district to cover the costs of said maintenance, known as
Assessment District No. 1065, ordering the work, confirming the 2008-2009
13
10/0112007
Assessment Roll, and determining tbat the Special Assessment Investigation,
Limitation and Majority protest Act of 1931 shall not apply.
Mayor/Chainnan Morris opened the hearing.
No public comments were received.
City Clerk Rachel Clark advised that one ballot had been received; and was in
favor of the proposed assessment.
Council Member/Commissioner Kelley made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Baxter, that the hearing be closed; and that said
resolution be adopted.
The motion carried and Resolution No. 2007-415 was adopted by the following
vote: Ayes: Council Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
Derry, Kelley, Johnson, McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None
27. ORD. MC-12S7 - An Ordinance of the City of San Bernardino establishing
a temporary moratorium on the establishment and operation of new
parolee/probationer group homes, registered sex offender group homes and
unlicensed group homes. FINAL READING
Joe Ortiz, 387 West 25th Street, San Bernardino, CA, spoke about City
Attorney Penman's efforts to regulate unlicensed, unsupervised, and substandard
parolee housing; and the editorial in The Sun newspaper on September 19,
2007, regarding this matter.
Council Member/Commissioner Derry made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner McCammack, that said ordinance be adopted.
Ordinance No. MC-1257 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson, McCammack.
Nays: Council Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter. Absent: None.
28. RES. 2007-416 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City
of San Bernardino ratifying the retention of Atkinson, Andelson, Loya,
Rudd & Romo for legal services provided in the case of Evlyn Wilcox v. Karl
Verjil (Marianne Milligan, Real Party in Interest), San Bernardino County
Superior Court, Case No. CIVSS 705111. (Continued from September 17,
2(07)
14
1 % 1/2007
City Attorney Penman stated that since this item involves an election he is in, to
avoid a perceived conflict he would leave the dais and Assistant City Attorney
Easland would take his place and answer any questions the Mayor or Council
may have.
Council Member/Commissioner McCammack questioned why the City had
needed to hire a lawyer if this was simply a subpoena to request personnel
records.
City Manager Wilson answered that when such a document comes in, if you are
not an attorney, you may not really understand what is involved. Staff was
looking for someone to simply say that this is how you should respond to this
kind of a document.
Ms. McCammack stated that she saw the subpoena and it said, "Turn over the
records," and consisted of about three paragraphs.
Mr. Wilson replied that when you receive something from an attorney, there is
a comfort level that has to be there for the staff responding to those kinds of
things.
Council Member/Commissioner Estrada made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Baxter, that said resolution .be adopted.
Resolution No. 2007-416 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
29. An Ordinance of the City of San Bernardino amending Section 3.44.030 of
the San Bernardino Municipal Code Chapter 3.44, Telephone User's Tax to
clarify original intent. FIRST READING (Continued from September 17,
20(7)
Council Member/Commissioner McCammack made a motion, seconded by
Council Member/Commissioner Estrada, that the matter be tabled.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Derry,
Council Members/
Kelley, Johnson,
30. Discussion regarding Utility User's Tax (UUT)
City Manager Wilson provided an overview of the staff report, noting that a
reduction in the UUT rate would likely be needed to ensure passage by the
15
1 % 1/2007
voters of an updated utility tax ordinance. He stated that if the Council's desire
was to incorporate a rate reduction into the measure, there were essentially two
main options, as follows:
Option I: Reduce UUT rate across all utilities - A rate reduction from 7.83 %
to 7.75% across all utilities could result in a $258,000 reduction in UUT
revenue annually.
Option 2: Reduce UUT rate only on telecommunications - A rate reduction
from 7.83% to 7.75% on telecommunications only could result in a $91,600
reduction in UUT annually.
Mayor/Chairman Morris advised that the City had done some polling on this
matter that had showed a substantially favorable response from the electorate for
an updated ordinance, even without the rate reduction.
Council Member/Commissioner McCammack made a motion, seconded by
Council Member/Commissioner Kelley, that the Mayor and Common Council
consider and provide direction concerning possible UUT ordinance options, and
direct the City Attorney's Office to prepare a draft revision of the UUT
ordinance, along with other necessary documents, based on Option 1 in the staff
report (reduce UUT rate across all utilities from 7.83% to 7.75%), in order to
place the matter on the Febmary 2008 ballot.
The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members/
Commissioners Brinker, Derry, Kelley, McCammack. Nays: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Johnson. Absent: None.
31. An Ordinance of the City of San Bernardino Municipal Code adding
Chapter 9.93 to the San Bernardino Municipal Code and establishing
Adm;n;~tive Civil Penalties for violations of the Municipal Code. FIRST
READING
Note: No ordinance was distributed with the backup materials.
Council Member/Commissioner McCammack made a motion, seconded by
Council Member/Commissioner Kelley, that the matter be referred to the
Legislative Review Committee.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Derry ,
Council Members/
Kelley, Johnson,
16
10/01/2007
32. Request for the purcllase and installation of banner poles on University
Parkway
Council Member/Commissioner Kelley noted that for quite some time the City
has had banner poles that market the venues in our city on Hospitality Lane,
Highland Avenue, "E" Street, and Mt. Vernon Avenue; and for quite some time
there has been a disconnect between the north end of our city and the rest of the
city. He stated that he could think of no other street that has the volume of
traffic that University Parkway does, including the commuter traffic going to the
University. He read a letter from Al Karnig, President of Cal State University,
in which he thanked Mr. Kelley for his enthusiastic support for creating a
banner on University Parkway that would signal the presence of the University
District as well as identify other events in our city such as the Little League
Tournament, Route 66, etc.
Mayor/Chairman Morris inquired about the cost and the source of funding.
City Manager Wilson stated that the cost would be approximately $76,000, and
he believed the recommendation was for the funds to come from the Community
Development Commission.
Maggie Pacheco, Executive Director of the Economic Development Agency,
advised that the EDA budget was approved in June, that all the line items in the
budget were spoken for, and this was a new item that had arisen after the EDA
budget had been approved. She stated that in order for the Economic
Development Agency to fund this item, her recommendation would be that the
Council look to the reserve fund that they had all agreed at the last workshop
that they would not tap into until they carne up with a city-wide strategy on
economic development activities. She stated that this item would be a matter for
the Commission to discuss and that perhaps it would be appropriate to forward
the item to the Redevelopment Committee.
Council Member/Commissioner Kelley stated that this was the right thing to do
for the entire city and urged his colleagues to support this proposal.
Council Member/Commissioner Estrada noted that the Council has talked about
the need to market different parts of the city, and obviously this is a very
important part of our community. She stated that she totally agreed that they
ought to do something, that the cost was not an insurmountable amount, and she
thought they could fmd the money in salary savings or project savings, or
unused CDBG monies.
17
10/01/2007
Council Member/Commissioner McCammack suggested the possibility of using
Civic and Promotion funding, Charter 186 salary savings, or leftover, un-
programmed CDBG money.
Ms. Pacheco advised that this was not an eligible use for CDBG funding-that
installation of a banner is not considered a capital improvement per se. She
stated that if the Council wanted her to look for other resources in the EDA
budget, she was scheduled to come back before the Community Development
Commission to present a budget amendment that they had previously authorized,
and at that time she could address the appropriate funding source.
Ms. McCammack stated that she was not talking about the actual expenditure
for the banner with CDBG money, but there was some installation that would be
required that would be more permanent; and that was the part she was talking
about as far as CDBG money was concerned.
Council Member/Commissioner Estrada stated that the only reason that she
supported the Economic Development Agency footing the bill for this was that
that particular part of the community does generate quite a bit of tax increment,
and there are a lot of reasons why they should be doing other things to promote
different parts of the city.
Council Member/Commissioner Kelley made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Brinker, that the Community Development Commission
authorize the request for $76,000 for the purchase and installation of banner
poles on University Parkway.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Derry ,
Council Members/
Kelley, Johnson,
COMMUNITY DEVEWPMENT COMMISSION
Staff Present: Mayor/Chairman Morris; Council Members/Commissioners Estrada,
Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson, McCammack; Economic Development
Agency Executive Director Pacheco and Special Counsel Sabo, City Clerk Clark.
Absent: None.
18
10/01/2007
R33. RES. CDC/2007-28 - Resolution of the Community Development
Commi!O.sion of the City of San Bernardino approving and authorizing the
Executive Director of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of San
Bernardino ("Agency") to execute (1) a Redevelopment Cooperation
Agreement by and between the Agency and the Inland Valley Development
Agency ("IVDA") and (2) a Single Family Inclusionary Housing Owner
Participation Agreement ("OPA") by and between the Agency and GFC
Enterprises, LLC, for the development of Lynwood Housing Development
(lVDA Redevelopment Project Area).
Council Member/Commissioner McCammack made a motion, seconded by
Council Member/Commissioner Estrada, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. CDC/2007-28 was adopted by the following vote:
Council Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry,
Johnson, McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Kelley,
PLANNING
34. Public hearing - an ordinance amending Chapter 19.08 of the Development
Code to permit social service centers as a conditional use in the IL,
Industrial Light, land use district & Conditional Use Permit No. 07-03 to
construct a 2-story, 34,833 square foot men's rehabilitation center on the
east side of Doolittle Road approximately 400 feet north of Mill Street.
An Ordinance of the City of San Bernardino amending Chapter 19.08
(Industrial Districts), Section 19.08.020, Table 08.01 (34) of the San
Bernardino Municipal Code (Development Code) related to social service
centers. FIRST READING
Mayor/Chairman Morris opened the hearing.
Valerie Ross, Director of Development Services, provided background
information.
Council Member/Commissioner Derry expressed concern that this matter was
not considered by a Council committee prior to coming to the full Council,
especially since it falls into the parolee housing issue and opens the door for
such potential uses in the area.
He stated that he was originally going to recommend that the matter be
continued; however, he did not want to hold up the Salvation Army on their
project. He stated that his main concern was that currently such CUPs only go
19
1 % 1/2007
to the Planning Commission for approval and he thought they needed the
scrutiny of the Council also-that all CUPs regarding social service centers, as
in this particular development code amendment, should be approved by the
Council.
Senior Deputy City Attorney Empeiio distributed an amended copy of the
ordinance that contained language requiring that social service center CUPs
would require approval of the Mayor and Common Council as part of the
approval process.
Council Member/Commissioner Estrada stated that she, also, did not want to
hold up the Salvation Army project; however, it looked a little like spot zoning
by changing the rule to do this. She stated that she had a concern relative to
social service centers-that it is a very broad term that covers quite a lot-and
she was not quite sure how to resolve that.
Council Member/Commissioner Derry stated that this was only regarding
residential-people staying overnight and residing in the facilities.
Ms. Estrada stated that her concern was as it mentions "social service centers."
She questioned how it could be so defined that it is particular to the Salvation
Army and yet it is not spot zoning, and at the same time it is not being unfair to
social service centers.
City Attorney Penman advised that this was a difficult issue-that Ms. Estrada
was correct, this is very broad. He noted that the definition of a social service
'center does not have to be residential, and read Municipal Code Chapter
19.02.050, as follows: "A building or buildings used for recreational,
educational, cultural, or religious activities operated by nonprofit groups or
agencies that are open to the public. Related uses may include food service,
childcare facilities, job training programs, after school programs, medical
clinics, and other similar uses or activities. Residential facilities may be
established as part of the use. Drug and alcohol recovery facilities (outpatient
or residential) may be a component of the social service use. "
He stated that for the first time this would open the door for parolee group
homes in the city, which is not the intent, because here the focus is the Salvation
Army. However, Ms. Estrada is correct, it is almost like spot zoning; and in
order to get the Salvation Army in to do what they want to do, we are having to
open the door to a very broad category. He posed the question as to whether
something like this would impact a group such as the Boys and Girls Club, Casa
Ramona, or Home of Neighborly Services if they wanted to open up another
such facility in an Industrial Light area, and the answer was yes, it would-so it
is quite broad from that perspective.
20
10/01/2007
Ms. Ross stated that she would think that having the ability to file an application
for a social service center could not include parolee facilities because there is a
moratorium in place specifically prohibiting such facilities. She stated that
social service centers were established by the Council five or six years ago, and
this was in response to Central City Lutheran Mission and Mary's Mercy
Center, two organizations in the city, both in residential neighborhoods, that are
similar to the Salvation Army in that they provide a range of programs.
She stated that when the Salvation Army came to the Development Services
Department, it made sense to consider it non-residential because they frequently
have issues with how much density is enough versus too much when they are
getting into residential areas. So by allowing social service centers in non-
residential, i.e., light industrial, staff has the ability to approve or deny
depending on the specific location, the availability of services, etc. She added
that each use, in addition to the Salvation Army, would have to come in and file
a conditional use permit, and that individual application would be evaluated on
its own merits.
Mr. Derry clarified that he was not discussing this specific project, he was
discussing the development code amendment-he would like the ordinance to
require that the CUP would have to go to the Council for approval as it relates
to this specific development code amendment. He pointed out that the Council
was taking action on the development code amendment; however, it affects
more than just the Salvation Army, it affects any applicant. What he was saying
is that any applicant for social service centers providing these same services, if
they have to go to Planning Commission anyway, should also have to come
before the Council.
City Attorney Penman noted that under Development Code Section 19.04.030
(2), Social Service Uses/Centers, there are 15 provisions applicable to social
service uses/centers; and presently, one of those would prevent just a parolee
group home from opening up, although if this is to be adopted, it would be a
simple matter to eliminate this one exception.
Mr. Penman read Development Code Section 19.04.030 (2) (15), as follows:
"Single room occupancy facilities, boarding houses, parolee facilities, and
detention correctional facilities are not included in the definition of Social
Service Use.. He noted that this was an important factor; however, the other
nonprofits are included-this does not exclude them. He stated that if this is
passed, it's one step away from the repeal of 19.04.030 (2) (15), which would
then allow for parolee facilities.
Council Member/Commissioner Kelley asked if what he was hearing was if they
should approve this without Mr. Derry's concern being addressed, then they
could have group homes open up on Hallmark Parkway without coming before
the Council and without the Council weighing in.
21
10/01/2007
Ms. Ross answered that that was correct.
Council Member/Commissioner Derry made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner McCammack that the hearing be closed; that said
amended ordinance be laid over for final adoption (amended to require that all
conditional use permits to allow social service centers in the IL, Industrial
Light, land use district are subject to approval of the Mayor and Common
Council); and that the Mayor and Common Council independently review,
analyze and exercise independent judgment in consideration of the initial study
and in making a determination, and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration
and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Plan and approve Conditional Use Permit
No. 07-03, based upon the Findings of Fact contained in the Planning
Commission Staff Report, subject to the Conditions of Approval and Standard
Requirements (Exhibit 2).
The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: Council
Members/Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Kelley, Johnson,
McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: None.
35. Appeal Hearing - Appeal of the PlAnning Commiu{on's denial of
Conditional Use Permit No. 05-17 (Amendment to Conditions No. 07-03) to
convert 12 three-story live/work units into mixed-use units - north side of
3rd Street, approximately 240 feet east of Sierra Way in the CG-2,
Commercial General, land use district
Mayor/Chairman Morris opened the hearing.
Valerie Ross, Director of Development Services, advised that this project was
located on Third Street adjacent to the City frre station, was originally approved
as a live/work facility, and was now nearing completion. She stated that
initially the live/work proposal was that an individual would buy a unit, live
upstairs, and have their business on the ground floor; however, at this time,
ANR is requesting that it be mixed use, meaning the owner of the residential
facility does not have to be the owner of the business that is on the first floor.
She stated that when the Planning Commission considered this they had
concerns because they thought it was a change in the policy direction as
approved by the Council. She indicated that ANR would probably tell the
Council that the reason for the change is the slowdown in the housing market;
and that they have re-evaluated the feasibility of the live/work product and feel
that it doesn't make sense right now, or in the near future, to proceed with that
type of a product. Therefore, the request for the change.
22
10/01/2007
Ms. Ross stated that the design of the units would not change-that a person
would not be able to tell by looking at them that there was a change-the
difference being that there will not be interior access from the commercial
portion into the residential area. She explained that the permitted uses for
live/work and mixed use were very similar, low-intensity commercial and
office-type uses, so the change would not be readily noticeable.
She advised that although the Planning Commission had recommended denial, in
the Planning Commission staff report were findings of fact to support approval
of the request by ANR along with conditions of approval and standard
requirements.
Pursuant to Resolution No. 2000-279, City Clerk Clark administered an oath to
George Jordan of ANR Homes, Inc. that he would provide true and honest
testimony.
George Jordan, Vice-President, ANR Homes, 357 West 200 Street, San
Bernardino, CA, stated that ANR appreciated Development Services' support of
the change of use request from live/work to mixed use. He stated that he would
also like to note that in the Planning Commission's denial, they had actually
recommended that ANR come to the City Council for a rendering of an opinion
on this matter.
Mr. Jordan stated that as one of the pioneering projects in the Mayor and City
Council's vision for the renaissance of downtown San Bernardino, ANR
recognized that a lot of eyes of the development community were on the success
of this project, despite the fact that it is only 12 units. He stated that ANR
believed there were several reasons to support the change of use from live/work
to mixed use, and the most compelling reason was the appropriateness of the
designation.
He pointed out that one of the significant differences between live/work and
mixed use is that with the current designation as live/work, it would permit a
family who bought one of the units to use the downstairs area purely as
residential. He stated that it was their belief, due to the way the building is laid
out, and in its setting in a commercial area with the colonnade covering the
entrances of all of the ground floor work spaces, that using the units as a purely
residential use, with somebody using the downstairs as just another bedroom, or
something like that, would be an inappropriate use of that space.
He stated that they also think that the change of use would expand the potential
market for these homes, not only to include the small business owners who want
to live above their businesses, which is their primary market and continues to be
their primary market, but it would also open it up to singles, couples, or
families who would see this project as the first opportunity for them to live in an
23
10/01/2007
urban housing product-type in the City of San Bernardino; and yet they don't
have their own business and they see the ground floor retail or office space as an
opportunity for them to lease that space out to business to help offset their
housing cost while still living in downtown San Bernardino.
He stated that they have also had several prospects who are families, and who
are excited about the prospect of opening a new business in San Bernardino and
look at this as an opportunity to open a new business; and they would like those
people to be able to move forward with the process without the concern that if
for some reason their business did not succeed in a year or two years from now,
that they wouldn't be forced to leave that project but would have the opportunity
to lease out the ground floor space to another business.
Mr. Jordan acknowledged that some concerns had been expressed that a change
in use might result in the lots becoming a rental project, which carries
connotations of distressed rental housing in other parts of the city. He stated
that ANR appreciated these expressed concerns and wanted the City Council to
feel very comfortable that this would not happen in the Meadowbrook Park
Lofts-and they feel there are several reasons for this. First of all, in
consideration of rental rates for housing and the fact that the sales prices of
these lofts are in the $400,000 range, they don't believe that this would be an
economically viable investment for somebody who is looking for income
property in the city.
Additionally, the development is governed by CC&Rs and will be managed by a
professional management company, who will ensure that the property and the
exterior of the property is maintained in a way that benefits all of the
homeowners. Finally, language has already been drafted to include in the
CC&Rs that will be implemented upon the approval by Council, that would
require that an owner of the property occupy either the residential portion of this
phase or the ground portion of this phase; and with the current designation of
use as live/work, realistically an owner would be able to lease out the entire unit
if that was what they so desired.
Council Member/Commissioner Estrada stated that she had spoken to the
developers and had toured the facility because it is absolutely vital that the City
minimize the building of apartment units that could eventually go low-income.
She stated that the units are very nice, and she wants to make sure that the
covenants are in place that will ensure that won't happen.
She stated that in discussions with ANR, they have tried to reassure her that will
not happen-that they have had very successful projects in San Bernardino and
they continue to be committed to the City and doing projects in our community.
Ms. Estrada stated she was committed to supporting the project, but had raised
this issue because others had raised the issue with her, telling her to make sure
24
10/01/2007
that these very nice units do not go low income. She pointed out that there are
no funds in the project at this time that would force the project to set aside any
units for low income, and the prices are about $400,000. She stated that she
had looked very carefully at the design of the structures to make sure that they
still have an office that is completely separate from the residential area above it.
She stated that these are the things she stressed in her discussions with the
developer, and she has received assurance from them that that is not going to
happen and the City is protected. She advised that she was ready to move
forward and let them complete the project.
Council Member/Commissioner Kelley stated that he did have some concerns.
He stated that he assumed the reason ANR was now asking for a change to
mixed use was because of the downturn in the housing market. He asked
whether ANR had any other projects surrounding the area that they were going
to break ground on soon that would help ensure that those families moving into
these units don't get frustrated by the challenges that surround the neighborhood
and ultimately decide that maybe it wasn't such a good idea and decide to rent
their unit out.
Mr. Jordan responded that they are actively building homes in the surrounding
area and working on additional projects in the area. He stated that for several
years they have been working in cooperation with the Economic Development
Agency on building detached homes, with their primary efforts focused on the
two-block area that's bounded by Second Street on the north, Rialto on the
south, Sierra on the west, and Allen on the east. He advised that they have
worked independently and now continue to work with the Economic
Development Agency on expanding the boundaries of that single-family home
construction to the surrounding northern areas, moving east towards Waterman
and up towards Fifth Street. They have built approximately 55 houses and are
getting ready to start construction on three or four more within the next 30 days;
and some that are already in construction that will be completed within the next
30 days.
In addition to that, ANR Homes has exclusive rights to negotiate for
development proposals on both the Rudy Hernandez Center, which is directly
across the street from where the site of the Meadowbrook Park Lofts is, and
also for the Seccombe Lake area on the north side of Seccombe Lake. They are
also exploring and working with the EDA on continuing the work that they are
doing in Meadowbrook Park Lofts to continue to wrap around the corner of
Third Street and Sierra Way.
Council Member/Commissioner Kelley asked if he heard correctly that if he was
an owner of one of these new properties, it would be possible for him to lease
the entire unit out.
25
10/01/2007
Mr. Jordan stated that the language that would be provided in the CC&Rs would
require that an owner occupy either the residential portion or the commercial
portion.
Mr. Kelley inquired whether there would be a condition as to how long
somebody has to live there-could a person buy the unit, lease out the bottom
portion to a business owner, and then after six months or a year and six months,
if they decided they wanted to move out, at that point in time could they lease
the upstairs portion as well?
Mr. Jordan answered that he didn't have all the information from the CC&Rs
memorized, but they wouldn't be able to lease out both portions-that would be
a conflict. He added that the CC&Rs would prohibit this, and it would be up to
the enforcement of the board of directors to ensure that that didn't happen.
Council Member/Commissioner McCammack stated that the Council opened the
door to this project when Mr. Funk (previous director of development services)
originally proposed this change of zoning to allow live/work-that if she
remembered correctly, live/work was not part of the City's development code at
that time. So they already have made the move to help promote this project in
the first place.
She stated that she thought ANR's vision was admirable; however, it has been a
policy of hers since she has been on the Council that the Council cannot add to
rental housing-potential residential rental housing-in this community until
they have cleaned up what they have. She stated she worried not so much about
the rents in this particular project, but about the homeowners who are just
adjacent and all the homes that ANR just built where it is supposed to be owner
occupied. She stated that if the Planning Commissioners decided to deny it 5 to
2, then she was going to have to stick with her planning commissioner's
majority, as they would expect the Council to do.
Council Member/Commissioner Johnson asked how much the units would be
sold for individually, and if somebody was to lease the residential portion, how
much would that be monthly?
Mr. Jordan stated that the units would sell for approximately $400,000 each.
He added that it would be a bit challenging to assess the monthly lease because
this is a very unique product type, so it's not like you can go down the street
and say this is how much it leases for. However, generally it appears the
residential housing in this area leases for about 80 cents per square foot, so he
would guess that the residential portion would lease for about $1500 a month.
He stated that if you look at the monthly payments required on a $400,000
house with property taxes, HOA dues that run $300 per month, and assuming a
5 percent down payment, it works out to about $3300 per month, which is why
26
1 % 1/2007
he said it is probably not economically viable for somebody to purchase this as
an income producing unit.
Council Member/Commissioner Derry noted that in the design for the live/work
units there is no barrier between the residential quarters and the commercial
area, so the resident would typically be an owner/operator of the business.
Therefore, for mixed use they would have to modify the design.
Mr. Jordan ascertained that the units have already been constructed with the
physical barrier between the residential and commercial spaces.
Ms. Ross stated that her understanding was that the permits were issued for the
live/work concept, which had the connection between the residential portion and
the office portion; however, they haven't requested a final review yet, so if this
amendment is not approved and the opening doesn't exist, it's really a simple
matter to add it.
Mr. Jordan explained that the way the units have been constructed is the
division between the residential portion and the commercial portion is a wall
with a door in it, and the door can be locked, so that provides either access or a
barrier.
Council Member/Commissioner Kelley stated he was very excited about this
concept, and he knew that the same concept was being proposed in the north end
by the university. He asked staff whether this request was specific to this
development only, or could this happen with the live/work lofts that are being
proposed in the university district.
Ms. Ross answered that the same request had been made for the ones in the
University District; however, the applicant had requested that it be tabled by the
Planning Commission until further notice.
Council Member/Commissioner Kelley asked Mr. .Jordan how many folks had
actually been in and said they wanted to buy one of the units-not as a mixed
use, but as a live/work situation. How many have said, Yes, I'm going to buy
this, start the process, they have been approved for their loan, and they are
going to be living there and opening a business.
Mr. Jordan stated that the majority of the prospects that they have been talking
to are interested in both occupying the unit above and running their own
business out of the ground floor. He added that they have only been able to
represent that as an option given the current designation. He added that they
don't have any units currently under contract.
Council Member/Commissioner Kelley stated that he wanted every business to
be successful. He noted that ANR took a risk in the city of San Bernardino and
27
10/01/2007
he appreciated that. He stated that what they have done in the area has been
successful, and he would like to see them continue to succeed, but he was
hesitant at this point in time to grant this request; and he was sorry.
Council Member/Commissioner Brinker stated that it seemed to him that being a
developer was kind of a risky business-you put a lot of money out there, you
build a product, and you've got to sell it to get the return on the money that you
have already invested. He noted that the Council has talked about trying to
create a city that is business friendly and inviting, and here they have a
developer who has done numerous projects in the city and is committed to doing
some other very important projects-Seccombe Lake and others.
He stated that it seemed to him that the Council needed to listen to the
professionals here who are telling them that this is the change they need to be
able to sell this project. He noted that the alternative would be for the Council
to stick to their guns and say, no, that's not what we originally approved.
However, this could result in that product sitting empty for a long time and the
developer losing a lot of money, resulting in the developer being unable to do
these other projects that we are counting on in our city; and it leads into that
perception that this is not a city that is very friendly to developers. He stated
that he had a problem with that-he thought they should listen to the
professionals. He asked for verification from Ms. Ross that when this was sent
to the Planning Commission asking them to approve it, that it was staff's
recommendation that ANR's request be approved, and she answered that that
was correct.
Mayor/Chairman Morris stated that for the record, ANR has been the single
most devoted and long-term partner to this city in the downtown development.
Others have come and gone; others have come, and they are here, but they have
not yet developed. He pointed out that ANR has in every single instance kept
its word; and they have been the most vigorous in helping us re-articulate a
beautiful downtown. He stated that what they have done in Meadowbrook is a
magnificent transformation of a blighted area of our city into an elegant
detached home section of our town; and they are now stretching all the way up
to the base of Seccombe Lake Park. In addition, their partnership has been so
vibrant, and they have delivered in such an elegant way, that the City has given
them an exclusive on the Seccombe Lake Park development.
He stated that this articulation of a live/work enviroument is the first of its kind
anywhere in our city, or indeed in the east valley, and he thought, as
Councilman Brinker pointed out, that the Council had to trust the judgment of
this development group, who has been such a loyal and successful partner, with
their judgment as to what is required to allow them to move along with their
projects and not stall out midstream.
28
10/01/2007
Council Member/Commissioner Estrada made a motion, seconded by Council
Member/Commissioner Baxter, that the hearing be closed; and that the Mayor
and Common Council grant Appeal No. 07-05 and approve Conditional Use
Permit No. 05-17 (Amendment to Conditions No. 07-03) based on the
previously adopted Findings of Fact and Revised Conditions of Approval
(Exhibit 3).
The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members/
Commissioners Estrada, Baxter, Brinker, Derry, Johnson. Nays: Council
Members/Commissioners Kelley, McCammack. Absent: None.
36. Publie Comments
Roger Henderson, 2516 Valencia Avenue, San Bernardino, CA, stated that
three more killings had taken place in San Bernardino, which was unacceptable;
asked when the Council was going to do something about the parolee problem;
and noted that crime statistics indicate that crime in 2007 has increased over
2006.
Joe Ortiz, 387 West 25th Street, San Bernardino, CA, spoke about the
development of our city, and stated that Jim Penman had ended corruption at
City Hall and described him as the gatekeeper of the City's best interests.
Anthony Garaed, 966 N. Crescent Avenue, San Bernardino, CA, stated that
he was a parolee. He asked that the City quit blaming everything on the
parolees, and challenged the Mayor and Council to come out and get to know
the parolees and not to deny them jobs.
Jim Penman, 221 East Marshall Blvd., San Bernardino, CA, speaking as a
candidate, related the story of the train derailment in 1989, and his part in
seeking an injunction and negotiating a settlement with the railroad.
29
10/01/2007
Mayor Morris stated that insofar as the crime rate is concerned, we are in the
middle of a reporting period which will end December 31, 2007. However, for
18 months the city's Part I crimes are down 14 percent-with all categories
down 12 percent.
37. Adjournment
At 6: 12 p.m. the meeting adjourned. The next joint regular meeting of the
Mayor and Common Council/Community Development Commission is
scheduled for 1:30 p.m., Monday, October 15, 2007, in the Council Chambers
of City hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California.
RACHEL G. CLARK
City Clerk
By:
4c?~_
Lmda E. Hartzel
Deputy City Clerk
No. of Items: 37
No. of Hours: 4.5
30
1 % 1/2007