Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-Council Minutes CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO 300 N. "D" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 Website: www.sbcity.org Mayor Patrick J. Morris Council Members: Virginia Marquez Vacant Tobin Brinker Fred Shorett Coos Kelley Rikke Van Johnson Wen~ McCammack MINUTES MA YOR AND COMMON COUNCIL AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO JOINT ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING APRIL 26, 2011 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARDROOM 201 NORTH "E" STREET SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA This is the time and place designated for a joint adjourned regular meeting of the Mayor and Common Council and Community Development Commission of the City of San Bernardino from the joint regular meeting of the Mayor and Common Council and Community Development Commission held at 1:30 p.m., Monday, April 18, 20 II , in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. The City Clerk has caused to be posted the order of adjournment of said meeting held on Monday, April 18, 20 II , and has on file in the office of the City Clerk an affidavit of said posting together with a copy of said order which was posted at 12 p.m., Tuesday, April 19, 2011, on the bulletin board located in the City Hall breezeway. The joint adjourned 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 5:11 p.m., Tuesday, April 26, 2011, in the Economic Development Agency Boardroom, 201 North "E" Street, San Bernardino, California. Roll Call Present: Mayor/Chairman Morris; Council Members/Commissioners Marquez, Brinker, Shorett, Johnson, McCammack; City Attorney Penman, City Manager McNeely, City Clerk Clark. Council Member/Commissioner Kelley. Second Ward. Absent: Vacant: 04/26/2011 Council Member/Commissioner Kelley arrived at 5:27 p.m. 1. Pursuant to Government Code Section(s): A. Conference with legal counsel - existing litigation - pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a). B. Conference with legal counsel - anticipated litigation - significant exposure to litigation - pursuant to subdivision (b) (I), (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. The Mayor and Common Council did not recess to closed session during this meeting. Mayor/Chairman Morris announced the passing during the past week of two former Sixth Ward Council members, Norris P. Gregory, Ir. and Valerie Pope-Ludlam, and provided the dates and times of their services. Mayor/Chairman Morris introduced Dr. Bill Mathis of the Mathis Group, a management psychologist who facilitated workshops for the Mayor and Council last year and would be facilitating today's meeting. 2. Boards and Commissions City Manager McNeely provided an overview of the staff report contained in the backup materials. The report was divided into four separate issues relative to the various board and commissions and was discussed accordingly. 2 04/26/2011 Issue I - Eliminating Boards and Commissions That Have Served Their Purpose or Are Inactive The three commissions recommended for elimination were the Central City Parking Place Commission, the Community Television Commission and the Youth Advisory Commission. Lori Tillery, Project Manager, Economic Development Agency, answered questions relative to the Central City Parking Place Commission and the Community Television Commission. Kevin Hawkins, Director of Parks, Recreation and Community Services, addressed questions relative to the Youth Advisory Commission. Council Member/Commissioner McCammack noted that combining committees had been discussed at the Legislative Review Committee (LRC); however, it was never moved out of the LRC due to several questions about the commissions/committees and their roles. Public Comments: Joe Ortiz, San Bernardino, CA. Council Member/Commissioner Shorett made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Brinker, to eliminate the Central City Parking Place Commission, the Community Television Commission, and the Youth Advisory Board. (No vote was taken.) City Attorney Penman advised that the public should be able to understand what is going to be done at a meeting, and he didn't think there was enough specificity on the agenda to take this action. He stated that a new ordinance may be needed on some of the items, and that an ordinance cannot be repealed by a motion-another ordinance would have to be adopted to repeal it. Council Member/Commissioner Shorett amended his motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Brinker, that staff be directed to take whatever steps are necessary to eliminate the three commissions. Council Member/Commissioner McCammack stated that she thought it would be wiser and a better use of staff time if they simply allowed these commissions to be dormant or inactive so staff would not have to do any additional work to eliminate them. Mr. Penman suggested that the motion be worded to "consider" the elimination since the Council had not heard from the public. 3 04/26/2011 Council Member/Commissioner Shorett made a second amendment to his motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Brinker, that the Mayor and Common Council consider the elimination of the Central City Parking Place Commission, the Community Television Commission, and the Youth Advisory Commission and direct staff to take the necessary steps to bring the matter back to the Mayor and Common Council. The motion carried with McCammack voting "no" and Kelley absent. Issue 2 - Combining Boards & Commissions with Overlapping Roles and Responsibilities Note: The staff report proposed combining the Board of Fire Commissioners, the Animal Control Commission, the Bureau of Franchises, and the Board of Police Commissioners into a single Public Safety Commission. Police Chief Kilmer stated that it takes about nine staff members to prepare for, attend, and follow up on the Board of Police Commissioners at a cost of approximately $1,000 per meeting per month for all staff involved. He added that the Police Department also provides support for the Human Relations Commission and has recently taken on the Animal Control Commission. He stated that he envisions a Public Safety Commission with an agenda that covers the individual issues. This would mean that the public would have only one meeting to attend. Fire Chief Conrad stated that he has been chief for 4V2 years and it has been very difficult to get a quorum for the Board of Fire Commissioners; in fact, in the last 24 months they have had a quorum only four times, which makes it very difficult to accomplish anything. He thought that combining these commissions made a lot of sense. Public Comments: Felix D'Amico, San Bernardino, CA - member of the Board of Police Commissioners and the Parks and Recreation Commission. Insofar as a combined Public Safety Commission is concerned, it was suggested that cross training of the commission members be provided and that consideration be given to increasing the number of commission members appointed by each Council member. Council Member/Commissioner McCammack stated that maybe this was the time to talk about a Public Safety Director for the City. Council Member/Commissioner Brinker stated that he would like to see a cost analysis of the savings if this action is taken. 4 04/26/2011 Council Member/Commissioner McCammack stated that she would like to see some type of "road map" of the restructuring. She also expressed concern regarding how the decision would be made insofar as "firing" some of the current commission members. Police Chief Kilmer stated that a couple of different options have been discussed. One is to reconstitute the Public Safety Commission and make the appointments starting from ground zero. The other is to form a commission of a different size (maybe in transition from the various commissions that currently exist) and then have that reduced down in number over a period of time. However, he felt there were other options that would fall between these two ideas that could be brought back and presented to the Council. City Attorney Penman provided background information regarding the number of vacancies that have existed on several of the commissions. He stated that he believed it was important for the Board of Building Commissioners and the Planning Commission to continue to have alternate positions. He also provided information as to why some of the commissions were established, stating that for many of them the motivation for establishment was not included in the establishing ordinance. Mayor/Chairman Morris noted that a requirement for the Board of Fire Commissioners is that six of the nine members have specialized experience in fire insurance, fire control administration, or fire control. Mayor/Chairman Morris stated that he has made numerous efforts trying to find individuals who meet these specialty requirements, to no avail. He suggested that no matter what else they do, they should either abolish this requirement, or at least reduce the number of individuals required to have this specialty experience. Council Member/Commissioner McCammack made a motion that if all else fails that the Mayor and Council at least make that alternate change. The motion failed for lack of a second. Council Member/Commissioner Brinker made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Shorett, that staff be directed to prepare the necessary documentation to create a Public Safety Commission by combining the Fire Commission, Animal Control Commission, and Bureau of Franchises together with the Police Commission, and transferring the public safety functions of the Human Relations Commission to the Public Safety Commission. The motion carried with McCammack voting "no." Issue 3 - Update, Modernize, or Amend Structure or Scope of Existing Boards and Commissions According to staff's recollection, the Santa Ana River Trail had not met for approximately 36 months. Council Member/Commissioner McCammack stated 5 04/2612011 this was one committee that she had thought would either go inactive or be eliminated, because she thought it was a waste of staffs time. She stated that it had an initial purpose and the volunteers did an excellent job, but she thought it was time for it to go inactive and reactivate if either new grant money comes forward or new opportunities for completion or addition to the trail itself come forward. Relative to the Board of Building Commissioners (BBC) and redefining their appeal authority-she had no problem with that because that's leaving the Board intact; however, if they've got no appeal authority, she wondered exactly what their responsibility and their role would be. She thought that eliminating alternates on any of the commissions was a mistake. City Attorney Penman stated that insofar as the Board of Building Commissioners was concerned, his office, which probably deals the most with the appeals process, has no problem under the current structure of the administrative citations and administrative civil penalties doing away with the appeal process. He noted that the reason the appeal was put to the Board of Building Commissioners was that the Mayor and Council did not want to have to deal with it, and that was a wise decision because the Mayor and Council could get bogged down in hearing a lot of individual cases, and it would be problematic. He stated that there has been consideration made of farming out much of the process of the hearings to a company that does this type of work for profit. However, in talking to other cities and the County Counsel's office where the process has been done, that can become a problem. The companies are there to make a profit, not to administer justice, and when people call up and ask for a hearing, some of them have been told, "We're sorry but you missed the deadline." They have said, "Well, no one told us about the deadline," and the reply has been, "Well, that's your problem." We don't do that in the City of San Bernardino~we go out of our way to make sure that everybody gets a notice and everybody gets their chance to be heard. He stated that if we are going to go to a commercial company to provide justice for the people of San Bernardino, an appeal process is needed because we are going to be in the same situation that we've been in with the company that bills people for ambulance rides. We are going to get all of the complaints, especially from senior citizens, relative to billing problems. He stated that if we continue with the present structure and it isn't broken, there is no need to fix it-there is no need, in the opinion of the City Attorney's office, to have an appeal process go to the Board of Building Commissioners and the Administrative Citation process. But, if the Council is seriously considering farming out to a for-profit commercial company, whose interest is not justice but making money, there is going to be a need for an appeal process 6 04/26/2011 for the citation hearings, be it ACPs or administrative citations. He stated that if the Council doesn't do it, he could foresee that a citizen's group would quickly form and by petition there would be an initiative ordinance presented to the Council to either enact or place on the ballot. Insofar as to what the duties of the BBC would be if the appeals of the administrative citations go away, Margo Wheeler, Director of Community Development, pointed out that ACPs are not appealed to the Board of Building Commissioners. Responding to inquires from the Council, Ms. Wheeler noted that appeals of the building code are very infrequent, that there is no problem getting a BBC quorum when needed, and the BBC met six times during 2010. Council Member/Commissioner McCammack stated that before the City Manager and staff go forward with any recommendations related to combining commissions, she would respectfully request that staff gather input from each and every currently affected commissioner, either in an email written form or at the next meeting (if it's timely), and collectively, so that the Council members can see the full breadth and scope of what their thoughts and thinking are before it comes back to them for formal action. She stated that if it was not the will of the Council to direct staff to do that, then she would gather that collectively from her commissioners. City Manager McNeely stated that he thought he had been clear that when they come back to the Council with the recommendation staffs intent would be to make this an inclusive process where they would reach out to every single board and commission member that is affected in this consolidation to get their input and recommendations. He stated that staff would like to make this a win/win situation where they come back with something that the commissioners are supportive of. Ms. McCammack stated that she would like to see the comments from the individual commissioners in writing. Mr. McNeely answered that he would be happy to do that and staff would invite the commission members themselves to be present when staff makes that recommendation. Mr. Mathis asked what the pleasure of the Council was insofar as moving forward on Item 3 (update, modernize, or amend structure or scope of existing boards and commissions.) 7 04/26/2011 City Attorney Penman stated that the idea of farming out the hearing process was actually presented to the Council during the ACP workshop-he thought it might have been last summer-and the Board of Building Commissioners duties are really broader than a person might have gathered from the comments from the Director of Community Development. He stated that the BBC is required to handle duties delegated to it by the Uniform Building Code, which is adopted by the City and by four chapters in the San Bernardino City Municipal Code-that it's not just the hearings of the administrative citations-there are other things that they may do. He stated that one of the things that is problematic that the City has not addressed for some time is the question of whether or not all of the matters that are supposed to go to some of the commissions, such as the Board of Building Commissioners and the Planning Commission, have in fact been going to those commissions, or have they been derailed by staff and not gone to the commissions. The City Manager needs to look into that because the Board of Building Commissioners has a number of duties that they should be attending to, but if staff does not agendize them they do not get addressed. Regarding the Santa Ana River Trail Commission, Mayor/Chairman Morris advised that several years ago they opened up that portion of the trail from Waterman into Colton; and the part that starts at Waterman and goes to Redlands has not yet been constructed, nor the trail from Redlands up to the airport in Redlands, which is the last paved portion of the trail that has not been constructed. He stated that that commission does have a role and advocacy because the trail is not yet finished-that funding is there but it has not been delivered due to the State's budget-so there is room for advocacy here until the trail is finished. However, when it is finished, he thought the commission ought to be dissolved. Council Member/Commissioner McCammack suggested that in order to continue to save staff time that they incorporate the Santa Ana River Trail Commission into the Parks and Recreation Commission because they go hand in hand. She stated that she thought the Parks Department is very successful in achieving and receiving grants and she thought they pretty much serve the same function. Council Member/Commissioner McCammack made a motion that the Santa Ana River Trail Commission be incorporated into the Parks and Recreation Commission and that they follow the written recommendation regarding the Board of Building Commissioners (as contained in the Staff Report). The motion failed for lack of a second. 8 04/26/2011 Council Member/Commissioner Kelley stated that he did not have a problem with Item 3 as written. He recognizes that there are opportunities for the Santa Ana River Trail and its extension and he knows that the County is working on the opportunity to extend it. He stated that when he considered how important the Santa Ana River Trail is, he thought that seeing it go to an ad hoc committee was a fair recommendation. He added that if something should come up in the leg of our trail-the system that goes through our municipality-they might want to have an ad hoc commission at hand to address some of that, but he knew on good authority that the County is working on the next leg of the Santa Ana River Trail. Mayor/Chairman Morris added that the County is the lead agency in the crusade to complete that great trail to the sea, which will be 110 miles long when it is all completed. He stated that we have good leadership from the County on this particular issue, and our group is an advocacy group to make sure it gets done through our city. Council Member/Commissioner Johnson pointed out that the Santa Ana River Trail Commission as well as the Human Relations Commission are two of the commissions within our city that the commissioners do not have to be residents of a specific ward. Council Member/Commissioner Brinker stated that a large portion of the Santa Ana River Trail is in the Third Ward and he distinctly remembered going to a meeting where they brought in an outside group from DC Irvine that had done some planning regarding some parks that they wanted to build along the Santa Ana River Trail. He stated that he was not opposed to changing it to an ad hoc committee, but he did want to see if the Parks Department wanted to respond to Ms. McCammack's suggestion that this should be incorporated into the Parks and Recreation Commission. Kevin Hawkins, Director of Parks, Recreation, and Community Services, noted that the Parks and Recreation Commission is an advisory body for parks and recreation related issues. He stated he was not opposed, as the director, to being part of the trail discussions, but if it required resource allocation, at this point they were not prepared to take on that responsibility. Margo Wheeler stated that with regard to the concept of derailing items that would go before the Board of Building Commissioners and Planning Commission-that is a very serious issue with her, and in the cities where she has had authority for the Board of Building Commissioners it is not unusual that there are not many appeals because it's a very rare thing for an applicant to appeal and offer an alternative to the building code, so that is not unusual. But the concept of not bringing matters to the Planning Commission or the BBC is a very serious issue and one she would never take lightly, so she wanted to put that on the record. 9 04/26/2011 Mr. Penman stated he was glad to hear that, but he still found it interesting that the Board of Building Conunissioners used to have very full agendas and had problems getting quorums; in fact, he almost lost some lawsuits because of it, and that was prior to the time that the administrative citation process existed. He stated he was not aware of any significant changes to the duties of the Board of Building Conunissioners, other than the administrative citation process. Council Member/Conunissioner Brinker made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Conunissioner Johnson that staff be directed to prepare the necessary documentation to change the Santa Ana River Trail Conunission to an ad hoc conunittee and amend the Municipal Code to allow the Board of Building Conunissioners to retain the Board's appeal authority of building code matters while eliminating its appeal authority on administrative citations. The motion carried unanimously. Issue 4 - Standardizing Structure of Existing Boards and Conunissions Assistant City Manager Kurita explained that this was a reconunendation standardizing the existing boards and conunissions by eliminating the alternates, where possible. She stated that given what the Council had directed staff to do on suggestions 1-3, that would involve a number of the conunissions identified as having nine members plus two alternates. The remaining conunissions to be considered for this action would include the following: Planning Conunission, Fine Arts Commission, Human Relations Conunission, Board of Building Conunissioners, and the Senior Affairs Conunission. Mayor/Chairman Morris stated that on the Planning Conunission, alternates are very valuable. Council Member/Commissioner McCanunack and City Attorney Penman expressed agreement with the Mayor regarding the need for alternates on the Planning Conunission. Mr. Penman also directed attention to Municipal Code Section 2.17.035, which states that every conunission in the City requires an alternate member. He clarified that this applies to conunissions designated in Chapter 2-that conunissions created outside of Chapter 2 would not be covered by that provision. Council Member/Conunissioner McCanunack made a motion to leave the Planning Conunission with two alternates. 10 04/26/2011 Council Member/Commissioner McCammack amended her motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Shorett, that the Mayor and Council continue the discussion regarding standardizing the structure of existing boards and commission until staff comes back with information and suggestions regarding items 1-3. The motion carried unanimously. 3. Mayor and Common Council Procedures and Operational Guidelines Council Member/Commissioner McCammack stated that she would like to see more public involvement on this item and suggested a possible continuance to the next regular Council meeting. Public Comments: Dave McCammack, San Bernardino, CA. Joe Ortiz, San Bernardino, CA. Council Member/Commissioner Marquez made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Johnson, that another workshop be scheduled to consider this matter. The motion carried with McCammack voting "no" and Johnson absent. 4. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 7: 12 p.m. The next Jomt regular meeting of the Mayor and Common Council/Community Development Commission is scheduled for 1:30 p.m., Monday, May 2,2011. RACHEL G. CLARK, CMC City Clerk By:~2.~ Linda E. Hartzel Deputy City Clerk 11 04/26/2011 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO 300 N. "D" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 Website: www.sbcity.org Mayor Patrick J. Morris Council Members: Virginia Marquez Vacant Tobin Brinker Fred Shorett Chas Kelley Rikke Van Johnson Wendy McCammack MINUTES MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO JOINT REGULAR MEETING JUNE 6, 2011 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 1:36 p.m., Monday, June 6, 2011, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. Roll Call Present: Mayor/Chairman Morris; Council Members/Commissioners Marquez, Brinker, Shorett, Kelley, Johnson, McCammack; City Attorney Penman; City Manager McNeely; City Clerk Clark. Absent: None. Vacant: Second Ward. 1. Closed Session Pursuant to Government Code Section(s): A. Conference with legal counsel - existing litigation - pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a): Jamora Allen v. City of San Bernardino, et al. - United States District Court, Case No. CV09-1388 JLQ (JCx); 06/06/2011 Brown, James J. v. City of San Bernardino, et al. - San Bernardino Superior Court, Case No. C/VDS /00775/; Justin Ryan Goldinf? v. City of San Bernardino, et al. - San Bernardino Superior Court, Case No. C/VSS 70079/; Landmark American Insurance Company, an Oklahoma corporation v. City of San Bernardino - San Bernardino County Superior Court, Case No. C/VDS /0/5/59; San Bernardino City Professional Firefif?hters, Local 89/, Nathan Lopez v. City of San Bernardino, et al. - United States District Court, Case No. CV /0-0/779 PSG (DTBx); Willie Mason, Sr. v. City of San Bernardino, et al. - United States District Court, Case No. EDCV/O-00504 YAP (OPx); Meiia, Maria D., et al. v. City of San Bernardino, et al. - United States District Court, Case No. USDC EDCV II-00452 YAP (DTBx); Adrian Moore v. City of San Bernardino, et al. - United States District Court, Case No. CV 0/ -03065; Parker, Donnavan v. City of San Bernardino, et al. - San Bernardino Superior Court, Case No. C/VDS /01347/; People of the State of California, by and throuf?h James F. Penman, City Attorney of the City of San Bernardino v. Marf?aret Sherman, Michael Sherman, Raiae Zarour, and CC/ Club SB UP - San Bernardino Superior Court, Case No. C/VDS 91788/; Michael Anthony Rey, by and throuf?h his Guardian Ad Litem, Christy Luna, vs. City of San Bernardino, Michael Billdt, Sf?t. R. Toppinf?, Officer Chris Gray, Officer J. Simpson, Officer C. Dai, and Does / throuf?h 50, Inclusive - San Bernardino Superior Court, Case No. C/VDS /009578; Paul Triplett v. City of San Bernardino, Chief Michael Billdt, Officer Christopher Gray, and Officer Jason Kinf? - United States District Court, Case No. CV-08-07257 JHN (AJWx). B. Conference with legal counsel - anticipated litigation - significant exposure to litigation - pursuant to subdivision (b) (I), (2), (3) (A-F) of Government Code Section 54956.9: James Kemp v. City of San Bernardino 2 06/06/2011 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: General Unit G. Conference with real property negotiator - pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8. City Attorney Penman announced that the following additional cases would be discussed in closed session: Under Agenda Item No. lA, pending litigation: Hector Briones, et al. v. City of San Bernardino - United States District Court, Case No. CV 10-7571; Under Agenda Item No. lB, threat of litigation: In re Rene Jacober 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. Moment of Silence A moment of silence was observed in memory of Ida N. Roberson. Invocation/Pledge of Allegiance The invocation was given by Sister Maureen Chicoine of Our Lady of Hope Catholic Church. The pledge of allegiance was led by Isaiah Jackson, a third grade student from Mt. Vernon Elementary School. 3 06/06/2011 2. Re-Appointments A. Robert Hampton - Mobile Home Board - Mayor Morris B. Richard Haug - Mobile Home Board - Mayor Morris C. Sandra Kurkoske- Mobile Home Board - Mayor Morris D. Steven Oquendo - Mobile Home Board - Mayor Morris Council Member/Commissioner Brinker made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Shorett, that the re-appointments A-D, as requested by Mayor Morris, be approved. The motion carried with Kelley absent. 3. Proclamations and Presentations Recipients of the Police Department's 2011 Awards were announced by Lieutenant Rich Lawhead with presentations made in the following categories: Police Cross, Police Star of Merit, Chiefs Commendation, Life Saving Medal, Meritorious Service Medal, Certificate of Appreciation, Dispatcher of the Year Award, and Historical Society Award. The City's four exchange students to its sister city of Tachikawa, Japan were introduced and given a Certificate of Appreciation and a City pin: . Tiffany Armenta, Public Safety Academy . Anthony Nguyen, Cajon High School . Arianna Ruvalcaba, Cajon High School . Madeline Sayre, San Gorgonio High School Carey Jenkins of the Economic Development Agency provided a PowerPoint presentation regarding the 2011 Spirit Award, an award given for a particular project or program that best captured and embodied the spirit of the Neighborhood Stabilization Program, which was presented to Eastpointe Village (formerly part of Arden-Guthrie) by the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development. Council Member/Commissioner Brinker requested current crime stats for the area. 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. 4 06/06/2011 5. Waive Full Reading of Resolutions and Ordinances Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Shorett, that full reading of the resolutions and ordinances on the regular agenda of the Mayor and Common Council and Community Development Commission dated June 6, 2011, be waived. The motion carried unanimously. 6. Council Minutes Council Member/Commissioner Shorett made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Johnson, that the minutes of the following meetings of the Mayor and Common Council/Community Development Commission of the City of San Bernardino be approved as submitted in typewritten form: March 3, 2011; April 4, 2011; and April 18, 2011; and that the minutes of May 2, 2011 be continued to the Council/Commission meeting of June 20, 2011. The motion carried unanimously. 7. Claims and Payroll Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Shorett, that the claims and payroll and the authorization to issue warrants as listed in the memorandum dated May II, 2011, from Barbara Pachon, Director of Finance, be approved and ratified. The motion carried unanimously. 8. Personnel Actions Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Shorett, that the personnel actions, as submitted by the Chief Examiner, dated June 2, 2011, 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 unanimously. 9. RES. 2011-112 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino requesting that the City of San Bernardino's Primary Municipal Election be consolidated with the November 8, 2011 Consolidated Election Conducted by the County of San Bernardino. Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Shorett, that said resolution be adopted. Resolution No. 2011-112 was adopted unanimously. 5 06/06/2011 10. RES. 2011-113 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino authorizing the City Manager to execute a Master Services Agreement by and between the Inland Valley Development Agency and the City of San Bernardino for provision of City services for Fiscal Year 2011/2012. Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Shorett, that said resolution be adopted. Resolution No. 2011-113 was adopted unanimously. II. ORD. MC-1351 - An ordinance of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino adding Chapter 15.27 entitled Crime-Free Rental Housing Program to the San Bernardino Municipal Code. FINAL READING (Continued from May 16,2011.) Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Shorett, that said ordinance be adopted. Ordinance No. MC-1351 was adopted unanimously. 12. RES. 2011-122 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino authorizing the Director of Finance to classify a portion of fund balance as assigned; and commit the revenues of the Animal Control, Baseball Stadium, and Soccer Field funds for the purposes of those funds. Council Member/Commissioner Brinker made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Shorett, that said resolution be adopted. Resolution No. 2011-122 was adopted with Kelley voting "no." 13. Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino authorizing the City of San Bernardino Fire Department to enter into an agreement with the County of San Bernardino to provide fire protection and paramedic services to County unincorporated areas within the City of San Bernardino's sphere of influence from July 1, 2011 through June 30, 2016. Discussion ensued regarding whether the City was shortchanging itself on this agreement, how to obtain from the County a full accounting of money they receive for fire services, and the suggestion that an escalator clause be incorporated into the agreement. City Manager McNeely acknowledged that the agreement probably does not cover all of the City's costs. He noted that many agreements include a provision that there will be audits, and this is something the City could do. 6 06/06/2011 Council Member/Commissioner Johnson asked if the City could look at making this a one-year contract and then explore the matter further. Fire Chief Comad stated that many of these County islands are mixed with City property and protecting these islands is very important to the City. He stated that his staff could determine the costs for this service. Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Shorett, that the matter be continued to the Council! Commission meeting of June 20, 2011; and that staff look into the costs the City incurs for providing this service, the inclusion of a possible escalator clause, and the wisest course of action insofar as the length of the contract. The motion carried unanimously. 14. RES. 2011-123 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino adopting a standard agreement to be used for gaining the permission of parcel owners to enter their property for the purpose of conducting prescribed and/or structural training burns. City Attorney Penman stated that this is a standard form agreement and does not remove all of the issues about when and where a burn can be done. He stated that it is important that the City Attorney signs off on each agreement, and he wanted to make sure there is a line that says" Approved by the City Attorney" that his office can sign off on. Council Member/Commissioner McCammack stated that she did not receive a copy of the resolution so she would be abstaining. Council Member/Commissioner Kelley made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Brinker, that said resolution be adopted. Resolution No. 2011-123 was adopted with McCammack abstaining. 15. RES. 2011-114 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino authorizing a purchase order to Sucaba Company, Inc. (Sucaba) for the provision of Workers' Compensation and Liability Claims Software Services. Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Shorett, that said resolution be adopted. Resolution No. 2011-114 was adopted unanimously. 7 06/06/2011 16. RES. 2011-115 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino authorizing the execution of an amended agreement with Mercer Health and Benefits LLC to provide broker and administration services for the City's Health Care Program. Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Shorett, that said resolution be adopted. Resolution No. 2011-115 was adopted unanimously. 17. RES. 2011-124 - Resolution of the City of San Bernardino authorizing the execution of an agreement with Corvel to provide Utilization Review services for the City's Workers' Compensation Program. Council Member/Commissioner Kelley made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Brinker, that said resolution be adopted. Resolution No. 2011-124 was adopted unanimously. 18. Resolution of the City of San Bernardino implementing a Memorandum of Understanding between the City of San Bernardino and employees in the General Bargaining Unit of the City of San Bernardino represented by the International Union of Operating Engineers. The City Attorney's office requested a continuance of this item until the next meeting. Council Member/Commissioner McCammack made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Shorett, that the matter be continued to the Council/Commission meeting of June 20, 2011. The motion carried unanimously. 19. RES. 2011-116 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino authorizing the execution of an agreement and issuance of a FY 2011-12 purchase order with NPA Computers Inc. for maintenance of the City's computer and networking hardware and operating system software. Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Shorett, that said resolution be adopted. Resolution No. 2011-116 was adopted unanimously. 20. Item deleted 8 06/06/2011 21. RES. 2011-117 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino authorizing the execution of an agreement and the issuance of a purchase order to Accela, Inc., for maintenance of the Permits+ System. Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Shorett, that said resolution be adopted. Resolution No. 2011-117 was adopted unanimously. 22. RES. 2011-118 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino authorizing execution of a Food Service Agreement with the San Bernardino City Unified School District for the delivery of Type A lunches to City sites for the District's Year-Round and Summer Lunch Program for FY 2011-12 (year one of three), with two optional single year renewals. City Attorney Penman stated that he had abstained on this item because his wife is on the school board, and that Agency Counsel Sabo had reviewed the matter and signed the resolution. Council Member/Commissioner McCammack stated she would abstain on this item because the school district is one of her business clients. Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Shorett, that said resolution be adopted. Resolution No. 2011-118 was adopted with McCammack abstaining. 23. RES. 2011-125 - Resolution of the City of San Bernardino approving the application for Statewide Park Program Grants Funds. Council Member/Commissioner Kelley made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Brinker, that said resolution be adopted. Resolution No. 2011-125 was adopted unanimously. 24. RES. 2011-126 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino authorizing the purchase of Omega Dashboard Web- Based Crime Mapping Services from the Omega Group of San Diego, California. Council Member/Commissioner Shorett made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Marquez, that said resolution be adopted. Resolution No. 2011-126 was adopted unanimously. 9 06/06/2011 25. RES. 2011-119 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino authorizing the execution of an agreement with the County of San Bernardino for the implementation and operation of all Biometric Identification Systems and DNA Services (San Bernardino CAL- ID). Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Shorett, that said resolution be adopted. Resolution No. 2011-119 was adopted unanimously. 26. RES. 2011-120 - Resolution of the City of San Bernardino authorizing the execution of an Amendment to the Lease Agreement with Casa Ramona, Inc. to extend the term of the lease for one additional two-year term on City owned property located at 1633 West Fifth Street, within Nunez Park. Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Shorett, that said resolution be adopted. Resolution No. 2011-120 was adopted unanimously. 27. RES. 2011-121 - 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 Fairview Ford of San Bernardino pursuant to Section 3.04.010 B-3 of the Municipal Code for the purchase of one 2012 Ford F-550 with an Eagle Service Body and one 2011 Ford F-150 4WD extended cab pickup truck to be utilized by the Public Works Department. Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Shorett, that the Director of Finance be authorized to amend the FY 2010/11 Budget and transfer $95,400 from Account No. 132- 400-5505-0000-0094 (Other Professional Services) to Account No. 132-400- 5701-0000-0094 (Motor Vehicles); and that said resolution be adopted. The motion carried and Resolution No. 2011-121 was adopted unanimously. 28. RES. 2011-129 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino setting the 2011 Regulatory Fee for the sale of fireworks. (Continued from May 16,2011.) Tait Ecklund, Management Analyst II, City Manager's office, advised that the advertising plan had been amended to include advertisements in The Black Voice and El Chicano weekly publications, as well as advertisements in La Prensa, a Spanish language version of the San Bernardino Press Enterprise, and La Opinion, the largest Spanish language daily newspaper in the Los Angeles area. 10 06/06/2011 Public Comments: Scott Olson, San Bernardino, CA. Council Members/Commissioners Johnson and McCammack asked about the Water bill insert that had been discussed at the last meeting, but was not now being considered as a means of notification. Staff advised that there had been a previous commitment to use a Water bill insert to notify residents of the new SB Direct program, and only one insert could be done at a time. Also, the calendar for inserting notices in the Water bills is made well in advance of the actual mailings, and staff did not know whether this could be changed at this late date. Ms. McCammack stated that since the Water bills are most likely directed to the adults at an address, she felt it was important to use this method to notify the public of the City's restrictions regarding the use of fireworks in the city. She added that it is the least expensive per household mode of advertising. Council Member/Commissioner Kelley suggested using the City's banner poles that are all across the city as a means of notifying residents. City Attorney Penman stated that he was sorry that his office was not contacted before the decision was made not to include the fireworks notification in the Water bills because his office prosecutes all of the fireworks violations except for the penal code violations that go to the district attorney. He stated that they use the Water bill as evidence to show the hearing officer that this information went to virtually every household in the area. Council Member/Commissioner McCammack made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Shorett, that said resolution be adopted; and that a notice be included in the Water bills, if possible. The motion carried and Resolution No. 2011-129 was adopted with Brinker voting "no." 29. 2010 Census - Establish Redistricting Task Force Council Member/Commissioner Shorett stated that he thought a representative from each ward should be included in the task force. Mayor/Chairman Morris advised that there would be a number of community meetings to present the recommendations of the task force to the residents and where the residents could provide feedback. 11 06/06/2011 Council Member/Commissioner McCammack stated that she remembers that in the past there were a lot of public/community meetings during the process, and everyone was allowed to speak. She stated that this took it completely out of the political arena, which is the way it should be done. City Clerk Clark stated that she has been on two of the redistricting task forces and there is certain criteria that has to be met and considered. She stated that the task force considers equal distribution of population, communities of interest, and geographic boundaries. Council Member/Commissioner Brinker stated that a couple of years ago the state passed Proposition II, which formed a redistricting commission and took the job of drawing the boundaries out of the hands of the politicians. He said that one of the big complaints that people had was that the politicians were drawing boundaries that selected people that were favorable to them to be in their district. He said he wanted to clarify that the people on this commission are not allowed to take into account political affiliation or party, and they will not be looking at where specific Council people live in an effort to create wards for particular people. City Clerk Clark affirmed that this was true. Council Member/Commissioner Shorett made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Brinker, that a Task Force be appointed, as described in the staff report from the City Manager, dated April 27, 2011, to begin the process of analyzing the 2010 Census data and potentially recommending the redistricting of ward boundaries. The motion carried unanimously. Council Member/Commissioner McCammack requested a map showing where growth has taken place in the city. 30. RES. 2011-130 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino authorizing the City Manager to execute and administer the contract with Southern California Edison concerning the use of funds from the Flight 5.6 Strategic Plan: Local Government Strategies. Council Member/Commissioner Shorett made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Brinker, that said resolution be adopted. Resolution No. 2011-130 was adopted unanimously. 31. RES. 2011-131 - Resolution ratifying the submittal of the Funding Request Form to the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) for beverage container recycling and litter reduction activities. Council Member/Commissioner Brinker made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Marquez, that said resolution be adopted. Resolution No. 2011-131 was adopted unanimously. 12 06/0612011 32. Appeal Hearing - Resolution denying appeals of the Planning Commission's revocation of Conditional Use Permit No. 93-14 (Appeals 11-02 & 11-03) (Continued from May 16,2011.) Resolution denying appeals of the Planning Commission's revocation of Conditional Use Permit No. 93-14, a permit to operate a night club at 295 East Caroline Street, in the CR-3, Commercial Regional land use district. (Appeals 11-02 & 11-03) Note: No resolution was distributed with the backup materials. It was noted that a settlement had been reached and staff was asking that the matter be tabled. Council Member/Commissioner Brinker made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Shorett, that the matter be tabled. The motion carried unanimously. 33. Public Hearing - adopting General Plan Amendment No. 10-01 A Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino adopting General Plan Amendment No. 10-01 to change the land use designation from Commercial Heavy (CH) to Industrial Heavy (IH) on 6.2 acres on the north side of Foothill Boulevard and 5th Street, adjacent to the future extension of State Street. Mayor/Chairman Morris opened the hearing. Margo Wheeler, Director of Community Development, stated that this item was a request for an amendment to the General Plan to a more intense land use. The subject site is the north side curb where Fifth Street merges with Foothill, including one parcel with a Foothill address and one on Fifth. The future southerly extension of State Street from Baseline to Foothill will cross the western edge of the property. She stated that staff recommended against the proposed general plan amendment, noting that this land use is the most intensive one in the city, which is usually on properties located adjacent to rail lines and in areas that are not prominent in the public view. The subject site will be visible from State Street, which is the major arterial connection. Additionally, staff's concern was that there is no Industrial Heavy (lH) designated property on the north side of Fourth Street and, therefore, there are some concerns with land use compatibility. Additionally, this application is only for the land use designation change and is not for a specific development, although the applicant has indicated that they do wish to move forward with an auto dismantling facility. 13 06/06/2011 Ms. Wheeler stated that the Council's action would be to allow any use of industrial heavy, although some of those uses would require a conditional use permit. The significant differences between the two uses are shown in the chart on page 4 of the Planning Commission staff report, which indicates differences in uses such as dismantling/wrecking yards, truck stops, concrete batch plants, which are not permitted in the current land use designation, but would be allowed with a CUP if this change were to be approved. The other significant difference is that there is a height limit of 45 feet in Commercial Heavy (CH), where there is no height limit in IH. She stated that the Planning Commission recommended approval of the subject general plan amendment and their findings are shown on Attachment 2 to the staff report. The Planning Commission considered the location, the potential uses allowed, and felt that the application would be possible to be approved; and their findings are shown in that attachment. Pursuant to Resolution No. 2000-279, City Clerk Clark administered an oath to all speakers who commented on this matter during the hearing that they would provide true and honest testimony. John Morrissey, Upland, CA, a senior commercial realtor representing the landowner and the applicant, who is purchasing the property to operate a pick-a- part type of operation that will be modeled after a pick -a-part that is located in Anaheim on Beach Boulevard. He stated that what they are looking for is the continued uses of the property, which will be further processed through a CUP application and qualified for this piece of property in every way other than taking parts off of a vehicle; and that is what is requiring the zone change prior to processing the CUP. He stated that the subject property has a lot of defects- earthquake faults running through the property, liquefaction problems, sediment problems-which would prevent the building of any large industrial buildings on this site. So even though there is unlimited height limits in IH, you could never build anything on this site because of the geological conditions that would fall into that classification. He stated that what they are proposing is a business that would take a blighted site and would give the City the street improvements with block walls, with vegetation, that would definitely improve the streetscape along State Street as well as Foothill Boulevard. He added that screening can be done as you are coming down State Street with Cypress trees that could eliminate any sight into the pick-a-part facility. The other thing to consider is that they are not looking at stacking cars two and three cars high-this will strictly be like a parking lot where people can come in and take the parts off of vehicles. This facility is going to bring sales tax dollars to the community, and it's going to bring jobs to the community. 14 06/06/2011 Mr. Morrissey stated that they are asking that the Council approve this condition for the zone change. The one benefit that he did see between the different zonings is the fact that CH allows adult businesses, where IH does not. So the Council would be eliminating any possibility of adult businesses going in on this site. He stated that if the Council agrees with the Planning Commission that this should be approved, then they will be moving forward with a CUP, because getting this zone change is a condition of their escrow. If the zone doesn't get changed, then the escrow falls apart. The previous owner did have this site approved for an asphalt and concrete recycling facility, which would have been bringing in piles of concrete and asphalt, grinding it up into road base, storing it, and then shipping it out as needed. However, with the economy the way that it is, he abandoned that usage for the time being and actually put the site up for sale. Ricardo Vallejo, potential buyer of the property, stated that he estimates it will create about 15 permanent jobs and sales would be approximately $400,000 per month, of which $80,000-$100,000 would be taxable retail. The other would be wholesale and scrap. He stated that he has four wrecking yards, two of which are in Los Angeles and one in Norwalk, which are full service yards; and he would like this one to be a self-service yard-that it has a lot of potential. Randy Wyatt, owner of Wyatts Paint and Body, which is a collision and repair facility located around the corner on Rancho, spoke in support of the proposed project. Council Member/Commissioner Johnson stated that he met with Mr. Morrissey and Mr. Vallejo, and the project they brought forward was a very good project. Then he talked to the residents and let them know what he thought and they shared their concerns with him, as follows: First, the changing of the designation from CH to IH-they said that there was plenty of property with the IH designation in their community that would support a CH business without creating another one. Secondly, the visibility from State Street was a concern. Even though they will put some trees up to block it off, it's still going to take a number of years for those trees to be effective. Additionally, the way the 210 Freeway is built we still have businesses right next to it as it comes into our community and some of these are very unsightly to people coming into our city. Thirdly, this is historical Route 66, and he was very concerned about what the places look like on our historical route-that these places will be conducive to the look we want for years to come and not just for right now. He stated that 15 06/06/2011 this gentleman was proposing to bring a lot of tax dollars into our community, which is a good thing, but sometimes all money is not good money, and the residents that he talked with have no desire to have this in the community. He stated that he was supporting the will of the residents in the community and he would be making a motion to that effect. Council Member/Commissioner Marquez asked Ms. Wheeler how many auto dismantling shops were in the city of San Bernardino and which ward has the most. Ms. Wheeler stated she did not have that information. Mayor/Chairman Morris stated that if you did a flyover and went down Waterman Avenue you would see a great number of dismantling yards that stretch out well beyond Waterman A venue to the east and there are others as well. Ms. Marquez stated that her ward is a neighbor to Mr. Johnson's ward and some of her constituents had shared their concerns about having this auto dismantling shop in that area. She stated that at the end of the day it is about the quality of life and she would not be supporting this. Council Member/Commissioner Brinker stated this was an unusual item and he wanted to get a little history. The Planning Commission voted to approve this item, and typically when the Council sees appeals it's the other way around-the Planning Commission has voted not to do it and the applicant then comes forward with an appeal to the Council. He asked Ms. Wheeler to explain to him how this ended up in front of the Council. Ms. Wheeler stated that in this case this is a genera] plan amendment and the Planning Commission is advisory only; therefore, the matter would come before the City Council regardless of the action of the Planning Commission-that changing City ordinances and genera] plan amendments are items that require Mayor and Common Council action. Council Member/Commissioner Brinker asked if there would be any impact on the City if the Council made this change and the applicant goes forward and finds out that this property is unsuitable for whatever reason. Ms. Wheeler answered in the negative, stating that if the Council action today was to approve, it would change the land use designation on this property and then any subsequent development would have to be compatible with that genera] plan designation within any physical limitations of the site based on hydrology or seismic issues. 16 06/06/2011 Council Member/Conunissioner Brinker spoke about some of the surrounding area that is now designated IH, and wondered if the applicant would be interested in any other property-did it have to be this property-or was there no suitable IH property in this general area. Ms. Wheeler answered that that question would be for the applicant and confirmed that Fourth Street in this area is essentially the dividing line; and south of Fourth is IH, but there is no IH north of Fourth. Council Member/Conunissioner Brinker stated that the final point he wanted to make is that while this is technically the Sixth Ward, if you were to go a little bit to the west, some of the closest housing to this area is actually in the Third Ward off of Macy; so whatever goes in there, the residents in the Third Ward will be affected by it as well. He stated that he was intrigued by this because he likes the idea of creating jobs and tax revenue, but he was not sure that this is the right location. Mr. Morrissy stated that almost all of the IH to the south are rail yards-there are only a few parcels that could be used for this purpose, one of which is where the applicant is operating his yard right now, which is far too small to operate on and he is already busting at the seams. This piece here is actually ideal because if you look at it, there are no residences bordering this property at all. You've got flood control on both sides, you've got industrial extractive to the north, and almost everything to the south is industrial heavy. Cheryl Brown, San Bernardino, CA, stated that planning in the Sixth Ward has not been the best and spoke in opposition to the proposed project. Council Member/Commissioner Shorett asked Ms. Wheeler what staff's major concern was in reconunending against this zone change. Ms. Wheeler stated that there were two principal reasons-first, that the existing IH is really south of Fourth Street and not north; and second, that Fifth Street and where the future southerly extension of State Street will cross the western edge of the property will bring higher visibility to this site. She stated that staff believes that the finding cannot be made that the potential change to the land use is appropriate in this location and internally consistent with the General Plan. Council Member/Commissioner McCarnmack stated that in reading the resolution that evidently was submitted to the Planning Conunission, on page 2 of the resolution it talks about Findings of Fact, and it talks about the general plan amendment being entirely consistent with the General Plan, that the general plan amendment will expand the available options for use of subject area consistent with the following general plan policy. It goes on to say that it will not be detrimental to the public interest and will maintain the appropriate 17 06/06/2011 balance of land uses within the city. She questioned how this was a resolution that the Council should deny, since the Findings of Fact are actually supportive. Ms. Wheeler explained that the Findings that staff originally recommended within the Planning Commission staff report for the meeting dated April 27, 2011, page 5, which is where the staff's findings are, that it is not internally consistent with the General Plan and that the proposed amendment may be detrimental. Ms. McCammack questioned how the findings in the resolution could be so opposite of what staff is now saying. Ms. Wheeler pointed out that staff made one recommendation and the Planning Commission made another recommendation, and staff's recommendation remains the same and, of course, the Planning Commission's recommendation is for approval. So the Council has essentially two different sets of findings before them. Ms. McCammack asked how one set of Findings of Fact can be put in a resolution, which looks essentially legal to her, and then have another set of Findings of Fact that are a complete contradiction. Ms. Wheeler stated that these are discretionary actions-they are opinions. Randolph Riley, San Bernardino, CA, member of the Northwest PAC, spoke in opposition to the proposed project. Council Member/Commissioner McCammack asked Deputy City Attorney Empefio what staff was given to make the determination that this kind of facility could not exist within commercial heavy? Mr. Empefio answered that the Development Code lists a table of uses which are permitted in Commercial Heavy as well as the IL and IH land use districts. Ms. McCammack asked whether this kind of facility was absolutely forbidden to be in a commercial heavy land use district? Mr. Empefio stated that he believed that was the case. Council Member/Commissioner Brinker stated that he didn't think they had fully talked about the extension of State Street and how that might have weighed on staff's thinking about this. He stated that it was hard for him to read, but it looked like the proposed State Street extension would take off a pretty big chunk of the property being discussed. He asked how that had weighed in staff's decision making. 18 06/06/2011 Ms. Wheeler stated that it did not have to do with the effect on the private property with regard to how much land was affected but rather the prominence of the site-it's visibility and its prominence in the neighborhood; and that it isn't a sight that is then hidden or on a lesser traveled street, but rather with this change it would be more visible. Council Member/Commissioner Brinker asked if the Council makes the change to industrial heavy and this gentleman puts his business in there and then two or three years down the road we go in to do the State Street expansion, are they then looking at eminent domain or having to do some sort of negotiations to take a piece of the property that now has some real value to it because he has a business there; and would they be creating more problems for themselves down the road. He asked whether staff was trying to think long term about what this property's usage is-if that was part of the process? Ms. Wheeler stated that legal staff might want to weigh in on that because future actions with regard to, say a property where a freeway was going to be widened and somebody is proposing a project, generally they are advised that that is not something to take into consideration. You merely view the project itself and not some potential other action that weighs on that property. The individual that owns the property has the right to develop that property, and future action by another agency generally does not weigh on that decision. Mayor/Chairman Morris stated that the ultimate goal is to extend State Street from the 1-210 all the way down to the Route 66, and that is going to be a parkway-four lanes, he believed, in its design. He asked whether the site would be visible for those folks going north and south along this parkway. Ms. Wheeler stated that, yes, that was her understanding. Council Member/Commissioner Shorett asked if the property and State Street are at grade, or is State Street elevated? He asked how people were going to see inside the facility if they are building walls and cypress trees and other types of decorative landscape, unless State Street is elevated. Ms. Wheeler stated that the staff analysis that was given to her indicated that there would be a point of visibility; however, at this time she did not have the full design features. Council Member/Commissioner Johnson advised that State Street would be elevated to the other side of Foothill-that it would be elevated past that property. 19 06/06/2011 Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Marquez, that the hearing be closed; and that General Plan Amendment No. 10-01 be denied based on the Findings of Fact in the Planning Commission staff report dated April 27, 2011. The motion FAILED with Marquez, Brinker, and Johnson voting "yes;" Shorett and McCammack voting "no;" and Kelley absent. Council Member/Commissioner McCammack stated that she thought they were in a really tough position, telling people what they can and cannot do with their property. Council Member/Commissioner Brinker stated that he was torn on this item- that he wants this gentleman to be able to expand and do his business, but he's not convinced this is the right location for that; and he doesn't know if they have really done anything to work with him. He stated that he knows the EDA will often go out and work with people and help them to find site locations and do other things to help, but he didn't know if there was a way to put this off for a little bit and see if they couldn't find something that was more mutually beneficial. Council Member/Commissioner McCammack made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Shorett, to support the recommendation of the Planning Commission to adopt General Plan Amendment No. 10-01. The motion FAILED with Shorett and McCammack voting "yes;" Marquez, Brinker, and Johnson voting "no;" and Kelley absent. Mayor/Chairman Morris noted that without a fourth vote they could not move on either recommendation at this point in time, so they were left with an unresolved issue. He suggested that the matter could be continued to the next meeting. Council Member/Commissioner McCammack made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Brinker, that the matter be continued to the Council/Commission meeting of June 20, 2011. The motion carried with Brinker, Shorett, Johnson, and McCammack voting "yes;" Marquez voting "no;" and Kelley absent. City Attorney Penman advised that if there are not four votes either way, then the matter is deemed denied-the application is deemed denied. Deputy City Attorney Empeiio stated that any action of the Council requires four affirmative votes. If there are not four affirmative votes to approve this application, then the application would be deemed denied for lack of four affirmative votes, even though successive motions of the Council on a motion to 20 06/06/2011 deny the general plan amendment application would fail, it would still be deemed denied because you wouldn't have four affirmative votes to approve it. Council Member/Commissioner Johnson stated that he was changing his vote on the motion to continue from "yes" to "no." The motion to continue FAILED with Brinker, Shorett, and McCammack voting "yes;" Marquez and Johnson voting "no;" and Kelley absent. Mayor/Chairman Morris advised that the motion to continue failed, and Mr. Empeiio's interpretation of the law relative to a lack of a majority resulted in a denial of the motion to allow this change of zoning. 34. Public Hearing - adopting General Plan Amendment No. 08-05 A Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino adopting General Plan Amendment No. 08-05 to change the Land Use Designation from Commercial General (CG-l) and Industrial Light (IL) to Industrial Heavy (lH) on approximately 7.69 acres and approving Conditional Use Permit No. 09-04 to expand an existing 28.7-acre auto dismantling and vehicle storage business by 7.69 acres and establish auto repair service at 701 North Waterman Avenue. Staff requested a continuance of this matter. Council Member/Commissioner Shorett stated that he did not believe this was in the Fourth Ward. It was noted that correct information would be brought back to the next meeting. Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Shorett, that the matter be continued to the Council! Commission meeting of June 20, 2011. The motion carried with Kelley absent. 35. Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino authorizing the City Manager to execute a Master Services Memorandum of Understanding with the Water Department for provision of City services for Fiscal Year 2010/2011. (Continued from May 16,2011.) Staff requested a continuance of this matter. Council Member/Commissioner Shorett made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Johnson, that the matter be continued to the Council/Commissioner meeting of June 20, 2011. The motion carried with Kelley absent. 21 06/06/2011 36. Eliminating and restructuring of certain Commissions (Continued from May 16, 2011.) Ordinance of the City of San Bernardino repealing Chapters 2.24 (Central City Parking Place Commission), 2.42 (Community Television Commission), 2.19 (Youth Advisory Commission), and 2.27 (Santa Ana River Trail Commission) of the San Bernardino Municipal Code. FIRST READING (36A) RES. 2011-132 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino establishing the Santa Ana River Trail Ad Hoc Committee. (36B) Council Member/Commissioner Brinker made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Johnson, that said ordinance be laid over for final adoption; and that said resolution be adopted. The motion carried and Resolution No. 2011-132 was adopted with Kelley absent. 37. Social Host Ordinance Council Member/Commissioner Brinker made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Marquez, that the Social Host Ordinance be referred to the Legislative Review Committee. The motion carried with Kelley absent. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION Present: Mayor/Chairman Morris, Council Members/Commissioners Marquez, Brinker, Shorett, Kelley, Johnson, McCammack; Senior Assistant City Attorney Easland; Economic Development Agency Interim Executive Director Marzullo and Agency Counsel Sabo; City Clerk Clark. Absent: None. Vacant: Second Ward. R38. Single-Family Residence Revitalization Program Third Quarter Report (January 1, 2011 through March 31, 2011) Council Member/Commissioner Johnson made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Brinker, that the Community Development Commission of the City of San Bernardino receive and file the Quarterly Report of the Single-Family Residence Revitalization Program activities (January 1, 2011 through March 31, 2011) for the Redevelopment Agency of the City of San Bernardino. The motion carried with Kelley absent. 22 06/06/2011 R39. Westbound Communications - Amendment No.1 to the Agreement for Professional Services (Public Relations and Branding Campaign for the Downtown Core Vision & Action Plan Area and the Economic Development Agency Revitalization Efforts) CDC/2011-28 - Resolution of the Community Development Commission of the City of San Bernardino approving and authorizing the Interim Executive Director of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of San Bernardino ("Agency") to execute Amendment No.1 to the Agreement for Professional Services by and between the Agency and Westbound Communications. Council Member/Commissioner McCammack made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Brinker, that said resolution be adopted. Resolution No. CDC/2011-28 was adopted unanimously. R40. Hospitality Building South, LLC - License Agreement for Electronic Message Sign at Hospitality Lane and Hunts Lane Adjacent to the 1-10 Freeway RES. 2011-133 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino approving a License Agreement with Hospitality Building South, LLC for an off-site electronic message center freeway sign and accepting an easement granted by Hospitality Building South, LLC (Southeast Industrial Park Redevelopment Project Area). (R40A) RES. CDC/2011-29 - Resolution of the Community Development Commission of the City of San Bernardino authorizing the Interim Executive Director of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of San Bernardino ("Agency") to execute a Three-Party License Agreement by and among the City of San Bernardino, the Agency and Hospitality Building South, LLC regarding an electronic message sign at a 1.26 acre site on the south side of Hospitality Lane, east of Hunts Lane (Southeast Industrial Park Redevelopment Project Area). (R40B) Council Member/Commissioner Brinker made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Marquez, that said resolutions A and B, be adopted. Mayor and Common Council Resolution No. 2011-133 and Community Development Commission Resolution No. CDC/2011-29 were adopted unanimously. R41. Phillips Construction, Inc. - Construction Contract for the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") Ramps and Sidewalks Project Phase II - various locations Citywide 23 06/06/2011 RES. CDC/2011-30 - Resolution of the Community Development Commission of the City of San Bernardino approving and authorizing the Interim Executive Director of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of San Bernardino ("Agency") to execute a construction contract by and between the Agency and Phillips Construction, Inc., for Construction of Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") Ramps and Sidewalks Project Phase II - various locations Citywide (40th Street, South Valle, and Northwest Redevelopment Project Areas). Council Member/Commissioner Brinker made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Marquez, that said resolution be adopted. Resolution No. CDC/2011-30 was adopted unanimously. R42. Joint Public Hearing - Disposition and Development Agreement - ACAA Limited Partnership, a California limited partnership - 542 North Mt. Vernon Avenue (Mt. Vernon Corridor Redevelopment Project Area) Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino consenting to a Disposition and Development Agreement ("ACAA DDA") by and between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of San Bernardino ("Agency") and ACAA Limited Partnership, a California limited partnership ("ACAA") - 542 North Mt. Vernon Avenue (Mt. Vernon Corridor Redevelopment Project Area). (R42A) Resolution of the Community Development Commission of the City of San Bernardino approving a Disposition Agreement ("DDA") by and between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of San Bernardino ("Agency") and ACAA Limited Partnership, a California limited partnership (" ACAA") and authorizing the Interim Executive Director of the Agency to execute that certain ACAA DDA - 542 North Mt. Vernon Avenue (Mt. Vernon Corridor Redevelopment Project Area). (R42B) Note: No backup materials were distributed. Mayor/Chairman Morris opened the hearing. Staff requested a continuance. Council Member/Commissioner Shorett made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Brinker, that the matter be continued to the Council! Commission meeting of June 20,2011. The motion carried unanimously. 24 06106/2011 43. RES. 2011-127 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino authorizing the execution of a Professional Services Agreement between Lewis, Brisbois, Bisgaard & Smith and the City of San Bernardino for legal services in the case of Cedric May, Sr., et ai., v. City of San Bernardino, et ai., United States District Court, Case No. CVI0-00978 V AP (DTBx). Council Member/Commissioner McCammack made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Johnson, that said resolution be adopted. Resolution No. 2011-127 was adopted unanimously. 44. RES. 2011-128 - Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino authorizing the execution of a Professional Services Agreement between Arias & Lockwood and the City of San Bernardino for legal services in the consolidated cases of Long Nguyen v. City of San Bernardino, et ai. and Lam Sinh v. City of San Bernardino, et ai., San Bernardino County Superior Court, Case No. CIVDS 1003080. Council Member/Commissioner McCammack made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Johnson, that said resolution be adopted. Resolution No. 2011-128 was adopted unanimously. 26. Public Comments Roger Henderson, San Bernardino, CA, spoke regarding an article in The Sun newspaper relative to limiting the amount of time that elected officials can speak at Council meetings. He stated that there are those who would actually like to hear more, especially if it meant more transparency. Scott Olson, Pacific Mobile Home Park, San Bernardino, CA, stated that residents have no voice and no representation insofar as the mobile home parks are concerned-especially with regard to violations by Santiago of the rent control ordinance. He stated that all the residents want is for the Economic Development Agency to hold Santiago accountable for existing laws regarding rent control, disclosure requirements, etc. Cheryl Brown, San Bernardino, CA, President of the NAACP, stated that the NAACP is concerned that our community and our city increases in projects that will uplift our community so it will be looked at in a positive way instead of how it is looked at in the region now. 25 06/06/2011 James Smith, San Bernardino, CA, complimented the participants on the very civil meeting this evening, and stated that the Native Sons of the Golden West would be selling fireworks this year at 2701 N. Del Rosa Avenue. He stated that on June 14 there would be a Flag Day ceremony at the Elks Lodge near Perris Hill Park at 7:30 p.m. and the public was invited. 27. Adjournment At 7:38 p.m. the meeting adjourned. The next joint regular meeting of the Mayor and Common Council and Community Development Commission is scheduled for 1 :30 p.m., Monday, June 20, 2011. By: RACHEL G. CLARK, CMC >f! City CI~rk , I~i-c?: ~ Linda E. Hartzel Deputy City Clerk 26 06/0612011 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO 300 N. "D" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 Website: www.sbcity.org Mayor Patrick J. Morris Council Members: Virginia Marquez Vacant Tobin Brinker Fred Shorett Chas Kelley Rikke Van Johnson Wentiy McCammack MINUTES MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO JOINT ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING JUNE 23, 2011 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARDROOM 201 NORTH "E" STREET SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA This is the time and place designated for a joint adjourned regular meeting of the Mayor and Common Council and Community Development Commission of the City of San Bernardino from the joint regular meeting of the Mayor and Common Council and Community Development Commission held at 1:30 p.m., Monday, June 20,2011, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. The City Clerk has caused to be posted the order of adjournment of said meeting held on June 20, 2011, and has on file in the office of the City Clerk an affidavit of said posting together with a copy of said order which was posted at 12 p.m., Wednesday, June 22, 2011, on the bulletin board located in the City Hall breezeway. The joint adjourned 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 5:10 p.m., Thursday, June 23, 2011, in the Economic Development Agency Boardroom, 201 North "E" Street, San Bernardino, California. Roll Call Present: Mayor/Chairman Morris; Council Members/Commissioners Marquez, Brinker, Shorett, Kelley, Johnson, McCammack; City Attorney Penman, City Manager McNeely, Deputy City Clerk Ochiqui. None. Second Ward. Absent: Vacant: 06/23/2011 1. Closed Session Pursuant to Government Code Section(s): A. Conference with legal counsel - existing litigation - pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a). 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. Mid-Management General Management/Confidential Fire Safety Fire Management Police Management Police Safety G. Conference with real property negotiator - pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8. 2. Budget Workshop and Deliberations - Fiscal Year 2011/12 - City, Capital Improvement Program, and EDA Budgets Mayor/Chairman Morris stated that as you look at the five-year projections for this City it is not a good news story. As we learn more, given the state of the economy and the state of our City's needs, we are in a great deficit and will be moving to a deeper deficit without some major decisions by the Council on going forward. 2 06/23/2011 City Manager McNeely stated that staff had planned for three hearings for this year's budget in comparison to the four that we had last year. The reason for the reduction of one hearing is that during last year's process the Council approved a two-year budget process. He indicated that additional follow-up meetings could be scheduled, as necessary. He stated that he would be making some overview comments, followed by a presentation by Barbara Pachon, Director of Finance, and then go back and reacquaint the Council with some of the past actions that this Council and previous Councils have had to take with respect to attempting to balance the annual budget. He stated that Ms. Pachon would also go through the proposed budget for this year and deal with some of the significant changes and some of the assumptions that have been placed into the budget. As part of that presentation, she would present an updated five-year plan. He stated that there would also be a presentation by the City's sales and property tax consultant. Mr. McNeely advised that this was the kickoff meeting for the City's budget discussions. He stated that this was the third budget that he has been involved in as city manager-the second that he has been personally responsible for submitting to the Council. He stated that he wanted to reiterate that this process is evolving, and it has been his pleasure as city manager to work with the Council as policymakers in an effort to do what they can for the long haul of stabilizing our revenue picture. He added that clearly we are still in the downward spirals of the economy; however, when we look at our numbers they have begun to stabilize somewhat. He stated that last year staff presented to the Council a five-year budget projection. He thought that the five-year projection was the first time that this Council or previous Councils had an opportunity to go beyond simply a one- year submittal. The key element in that look over the five years is that when you looked at what staff was projecting in the way of expenses, as well as revenue, the cumulative effect of that five-year projection was over a $40 million deficit. Mr. McNeely stated that staff spent a fair amount of time talking to the Council about that deficit and beginning to look at what was necessary in order to begin to change the likely path down which we were headed. He stated that this Council decided that everything needed to be put on the table-every single revenue item, expenses, all those things needed to be put out there and this Council needed to have a full blown discussion about which of these were acceptable changes, areas where the Council wanted to go, and which ways they felt uncomfortable with facilitating. 3 06/23/2011 We did that and at the end of that discussion we only ended up with one revenue option that the Council felt comfortable going forward with, and that was a Cost Allocation Study. At the end of that, this Council also made a decision, given the lack of other revenue sources, to recommend going forward, albeit reluctantly, with an 8 percent across the board cut. Those were the two keystones of the budget that was adopted last year, which we now have implemented. From a departmental standpoint, we dealt with that over the two-year process and we worked with departments to do what we called a first-tier cut. Most departments were able to get that 8 percent cut in the first year. Some of the larger departments had to take full advantage of the second year, but today most, if not all of those cuts have been made. With the status of where we are now, there remain some challenges. In implementing the 8 percent cut and continuing to deal with the challenges, we still have services of our City that are problematic. Some examples of those still remain in our parks. We are not able to maintain many of the parks in a manner that we would like to-our ability to maintain and mow those areas are problematic. We have gone to two- or three-week cycles rather then having those done once a week. We've also had threats for closure of our pools. We have many of our maintenance districts not being maintained at the level they should be. Last year as a result of the 8 percent cuts we were forced to reduce police staffing by 51 sworn personnel, and we had a number of cuts in our Fire Department as well. Our main library was required to close on Fridays and we also have some of our branches that have reduced hours of operation. In terms of lighting, we still have a huge backlog of many lights that are out throughout the City; in fact, we have over 1,000. In Public Works we have challenges with our fleets. Several vehicles are grossly outdated and are expensive to maintain. If we look at the cost analysis, it's costing us more to maintain the vehicles than it would be to go out and acquire new ones. Mr. McNeely stated that Ms. Pachon is constantly sharing with him that because of the shortage of our funds we are unable to go out and do any kind of bonding. Our reserves and our revenues are so low at this point that we are not credit worthy in the sense that we would like to be, and that poses a challenge for us insofar as going out and taking advantage of bonding capabilities that we would like to pursue. 4 06/23/2011 The following documents were distributed and PowerPoint presentations made, as follows: · City of San Bernardino Fiscal Year 2011-12 Preliminary Budget, Charles E. McNeely, City Manager, Barbara Pachon, Director of Finance, June 23, 2011 (Presentations made by Charles McNeely, City Manager, and Barbara Pachon, Director of Finance) · City of San Bernardino Sales & Use Tax Trends, June 23, 2011 (Presentation made by Lloyd de Llamas of The HdL Companies) · Public Works Department Fiscal Year 2011-12 Preliminary Departmental Budget (Presentation made by Nadeem Majaj, Director of Public Works) · City of San Bernardino FY 2011-2012/2015-2016 CIP (Capital Improvement Program) (No presentation was made - item was continued to budget meeting scheduled for June 28,2011) R3. Budget Adoption Fiscal Year 2011-2012 - Economic Development Agency Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, authorizing the funding of various City of San Bernardino fiscal year 2011-2012 public improvement expenditures and making findings and determinations pursuant to Health & Safety Code Sections 33445 and 33445.1 as to the benefit to the various redevelopment project areas for undertaking public improvements in connection with these various City expenditures. (R3A) Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, approving the execution and delivery of an Agency- City 2011-2012 Loan Agreement and 2011-2012 Note of the City of San Bernardino ("City") payable to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of San Bernardino ("Agency") in the principal amount equal to $1,356,250 for the repayment of the $1,332,925 principal amount of the 2010-2011 Note payable from the City to the Agency. (R3B) Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino, California approving a Master Services Agreement for fiscal year 2011-2012 by and between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of San Bernardino ("Agency") and the City of San Bernardino ("City") and authorizing the Agency's payment to the City for the performance of certain functions by City Departments for the benefit of the Agency. (R3C) 5 06/23/2011 Resolution of the Community Development Commission of the City of San Bernardino, California, approving the Economic Development Agency's budget for the Fiscal Year 2011-2012 with any such amendments, changes and modifications that may be specifically authorized by said Commission, except for those portions of certain budget lines which are related to the Central City Projects Redevelopment Area and the Uptown Redevelopment Project Area. (R3D) Resolution of the Community Development Commission of the City of San Bernardino, California, approving the Economic Development Agency's budget for those portions of certain budget lines which are related to the Uptown Redevelopment Project Area for the Fiscal Year 2011-2012 with any such amendments, changes and modifications that may be specifically authorized by said Commission. (R3E) Resolution of the Community Development Commission of the City of San Bernardino, California, approving the Economic Development Agency's budget for those portions of certain budget lines which are related to the Central City Projects Redevelopment Project Area for the Fiscal Year 2011- 2012 with any such amendments, changes and modifications that may be specifically authorized by said Commission. (R3F) Resolution of the Community Development Commission of the City of San Bernardino, California, authorizing the funding of various City of San Bernardino Fiscal Year 2011-2012 public improvement expenditures and making findings and determinations pursuant to Health & Safety Code Sections 33445 and 33445.1 as to the benefit to the various redevelopment project areas for the undertaking of various public improvements. (R3G) Resolution of the Community Development Commission of the City of San Bernardino, California, approving the Economic Development Agency's analysis and determination of the appropriateness of the planning and administration expenditures of the Low- and Moderate-Income Housing Fund for the Fiscal Year 2011-2012 Agency Budget. (R3H) Resolution of the Community Development Commission of the City of San Bernardino, California approving a Master Services Agreement for Fiscal Year 2011-2012 by and between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of San Bernardino ("Agency") and the City of San Bernardino ("City") and authorizing the Agency's payment to the City for the performance of certain functions by City Departments for the benefit of the Agency. (R3I) 6 06/23/2011 Resolution of the Community Development Commission of the City of San Bernardino, California, approving the execution and delivery of an Agency- City 2011-2012 Loan Agreement and 2011-2012 Note of the City of San Bernardino ("City") payable to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of San Bernardino ("Agency") in the principal amount equal to $1,356,250 for the repayment of the $1,332,925 principal amount of the 2010-2011 Note from the City to the Agency. (R3J) Resolution of the Community Development Commission of the City of San Bernardino, California, authorizing the Economic Development Agency to continue expenditures, except for those portions of certain budget lines which are related to the Uptown and Central City Projects Redevelopment Project Areas, at the budgeted level for the 2010-2011 Fiscal Year, with allowance for those budgeted items having prior Commission approval, pending final approval of the 2011-2012 budget. (R3K) Resolution of the Community Development Commission of the City of San Bernardino, California, authorizing the Economic Development Agency to continue expenditures for those portions of certain budget lines, which are related to the Central City Projects and Uptown Redevelopment Project Areas, at the budgeted level for the 2010-2011 Fiscal Year, with allowance for those budgeted items having prior Commission approval, pending final approval of the 2011-2012 budget. (R3L) Note: No Mayor and Common Council resolutions were distributed with the backup materials. There was no discussion or action taken regarding the Economic Development Agency budget. This item was continued to the budget meeting of June 28, 2011. 4. Public Comments Warner Hodgdon, San Bernardino, CA, stated that he learned a lot tonight, reminisced about getting his first building permit in San Bernardino when he was 20 years old and about building City Hall, and stated that one of the most important things that needed to be passed was the Transportation Overlay District. Roger Henderson, San Bernardino, CA, stated that we do have a problem with our parks and it all comes down to money-that Parks and Recreation has been cut to the bone. He implored the Council not to cut anymore in the Parks and Recreation area. 7 06/23/2011 4. Adjournment At 8:45 p.m. the meeting was adjourned to 5 p.m., Tuesday, June 28,2011, in the Economic Development Agency Boardroom, 201 North "E" Street, San Bernardino, California, to discuss the FY 2011/12 City and EDA budgets. The next joint regular meeting of the Mayor and Common CounciIlCommunity Development Commission is scheduled for 1:30 p.m., Tuesday, July 5, 2011, in the Council Chambers of City Hall. By: RACHEL G. CLARK City Clerk ~:t..~~ Deputy City Clerk 8 06/23/2011