Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-27-1990 Minutes City of San Bernardino, California June 27, 1990 This is the time and place set for an Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino at an Adjourned Regular Meeting held at 9:00 a.m., on Monday, June 25, 1990, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. The City Clerk has caused to be posted the Order of Adjournment of said meeting held on Monday, June 25, 1990, 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 8:00 a.m., Tuesday, June 26, 1990, on the door of the place at which said meeting was held. The Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino was called to order by Mayor Holcomb at 7:08 p.m., Wednesday, June 27,1990, in the Sturges Auditorium, 798 North "E" Street, San Bernardino, California. ROLL CALL Roll call was taken by City Clerk Clark with the following being present: Mayor Holcomb; Council Members Estrada, Reilly, Flores, Minor, Miller; City Attorney Penman, City Clerk Clark, City Administrator Julian. Absent: Council Members Maudsley, pope-Ludlam. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Bill Katona, former council member. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The pledge of allegiance was led by Council Member Flores. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. ( 1) PROTEST HEARING - CITY-WIDE STREET LIGHTING & STREET SWEEPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT - ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 994 This is the time and place set for a protests on the city-wide street lighting assessment district. hearing to consider and street sweeping (2 ) 1 6/27/90 In a memorandum dated June 8, 1990, Roger Hardgrave, Director of Public Works/City Engineer, stated that Assessment District No. 994 was proposed to generate funds to finance the costs included in the 1990-91 budget for street lighting and street sweeping. The proposed budget for these services is $2,515,838. This amount, referred to as "net proceeds" in the Engineer's report, would then be freed up in the general fund to be used for police services. Mayor Holcomb spoke regarding the need for additional police and why funding is being proposed through a street lighting and street sweeping assessment district. He stated that the crime in the City has increased tremendously and there is a need for improved police protection. Mayor Holcomb outlined some of the problems police officers encounter on a day to day basis. He stated that one of the most important obligations the City has to its residents is public safety. Mayor Holcomb stated that the City needs additional funds to provide more police protection to citizens and that the single most pressing problem the City has is public safety. Dan Robbins, Police Chief, gave a slide presentation on the functions of the Police Department and the problems the Department encounters as a result of the shortage of personnel and funds. Chief Robbins elaborated on the increasing crime rate and how the crimes are categorized. He further elaborated on the increase in response time, stating that it takes the officers much longer to respond to calls for assistance. Chief Robbins stated that there has been a 17.3% population growth since 1984 and the crime rate from 1984 has increased 45%. Chief Robbins calls and presented the various crimes. gave an overview on the response time for a chart on the different response times for COUNCIL MEMBER At 7 :20 p.m., Council Meeting. POPE-LUDLAM ARRIVED Council Member pope-Ludlam arrived at the Chief Robbins outlined the following as the goals of the Police Department: 1) reduce response time; 2) reduce fear of crime and increase visibility of officers in the community; and 3) reduce the increase of crime rate 2 6/27/90 The Police Department has three divisions: Patrol, Investigation and Services. The Chief is proposing to add sixteen uniformed officers for patrol, two sergeants and seven clerks. The Investigations Division will continue to be aggressive against the narcotics problem. He is also proposing the addition of another narcotics team and eleven community service representatives, eight of which will respond to traffic accident reports. This will free sworn officers to respond more rapidly to emergency calls. Chief Robbins further outlined the proposed personnel and equipment increases. Mayor Holcomb opened the hearing. Chief Robbins answered questions regarding the 17.3% increase in population from 1984 to 1989 and regarding the number of new police officers hired since 1984, stating that a total of 47 sworn police officers were hired in 1984 and in 1987 ten positions were frozen. Bob Keinan, owner of Bob and Al Tires, 106 N. Mt. Vernon Avenue, suggested an increase in the sales tax to pay for the additional police officers needed. He stated that he is opposed to Assessment District No. 994, because he cannot afford another property tax. Mayor Holcomb stated that the City cannot raise the sales tax. Only the legislature has that power. Richard F. Schmidt, 4855 Acacia, stated that the sales tax can be increased with a vote of the people with special provisions and that a special assessment district should be put to a vote of the people. He also stated that exempting low income people is unconstitutional because it adds more burden to the middle-class people. He suggested that the Mayor and Council explore this special district provision to eliminate implementing an additional tax on property owners. Robert Bell, 6434 Ventura, representing the Meadowood Homeowners Association in the Verdemont area, spoke in opposition to the proposed assessment district. He stated that the roads in his area are not repaired, there are no schools, parks, libraries, fire or police stations and that the sewer system goes unattended. He stated that any monies assessed would not assist, improve or benefit the immediate area. Mr. Bell stated that if the Verdemont area is guaranteed a police station, the property owners would support this assessment district. Tom McNeal, 3850 E. Atlantic Avenue, representing the Valencia Lea Mobile Home Park owners, stated that he lS not protesting the assessment district itself, but he is against the method in which the people will be assessed. He stated that mobile home parks do not receive any of the street lighting and 3 6/27/90 street sweeping. Mr. McNeal stated that the mobile home parks would be taxed more than single family homes because there are more mobile homes per acre than single family developments and suggested seeking an alternate solution for taxing mobile home owners. Bill Lyles, 220 E. 51st Street, objected to this assessment district. Mr. Lyles stated that the police benefits and wages are not bad, and the City should not have to bribe police officials and officers with enhanced wages and benefits to keep them on the job. He questioned the salary of an entry level police officer and the fringe benefits these officers receive. He further stated that this assessment district is an attempt to circumvent Proposition 13 and that he feels this cannot be legislated into law except by a vote of the people. He stated that the City is just adding an additional property tax. Billie Herd, 1380 W. 48th Street, stated that she lives in a condominium and does not receive any street lighting or street sweeping. She questioned why the request for additional police is being combined with a street lighting and street sweeping assessment district. She stated that if additional police officers are needed, then establish an assessment district strictly for police officers. Mayor Holcomb answered questions regarding the present street lighting and street sweeping services being funded from the general fund account. He stated that if these services were put on an assessment district, this would free up over $2 million in the general fund that could be used for police services. Mr. Holcomb stated that the entire police budget could be put on assessment district, but that would raise taxes ten times more. He pointed out that although people live in a condominium complex, when they leave the complex, to go to school, work or shopping, they would prefer to see nice and clean illuminated streets, so everyone benefits from a clean city and well lit streets. Dave Thomas, 1944 Clark Mountain Road, representing 110 home owners in the Mt. View Springs Estate, stated that he is not opposed to the additional police protection, but is opposed to the street lighting and street sweeping assessment district. The home owners in this development do not receive any of the street sweeping services and feel they should not have to pay for services they do not receive. Charles Hunt, 3096 N. "D" Street, stated that the property owners and residents in the City should be able to vote for this assessment district and he is opposed to this additional property tax. 4 6/27/90 Lester Meltzer, 711 E. 21st Street, objected to this assessment district and outlined the increases for the refuse, water and other services he is required to pay. Mr. Meltzer complained that the low income people are not being required to pay this additional tax. He stated that this is discrimination against the middle-class people and that any additional tax should be put to a vote of the people. Susan Johnson, Sundance Drive, spoke in support of the assessment district. She stated that additional police officers are needed to the deal with gangs in the City. Ms. Johnson stated she does volunteer work at the Police Community Service area on the north end of the City and knows the many problems being encountered by the shortage of police staff. Nelson Gardner, 1635 W. Home Avenue, spoke in opposition to the assessment district and stated he has been a city resident for 35 years, is on a fixed income and cannot afford an additional tax. Mayor Holcomb income residents. person and $15,000 explained that there is an exemption for low The exemption level is $12,000 for a single for a family of two or more. Joseph Czvik, 1138 E. 24th Street, objected to the assessment district. He stated that he is in support of additional police officers, but the street lighting and street sweeping assessment district raises too many questions. Mr. Czvik suggested that the City prohibit parking on the days the street sweeping is scheduled, otherwise it is a wasted effort. He also questioned the $1 million reciprocal easement contract with the Central City Mall, stating the City should not have to provide services to the Central City Mall. He requested that the City Attorney explore terminating the contract agreement and that the Council re-examine the assessment district. Mayor Holcomb explained that the City entered into the contract with the Central City Mall in 1970. This contract is for fifty years so the City is locked into this agreement. Gary Redinger, representing his mother, Louise Redinger, opposed this assessment district. Mr. Redinger stated that his mother cannot afford another tax and suggested that the Mayor and Council seek funds elsewhere. He further stated that if this assessment district is passed, he will file a claim against the City. 5 6/27/90 Walter Springer, 1207 W. Marshall Boulevard, spoke in opposition to Assessment District No. 994 and stated that he is on a fixed income and cannot afford an additional tax. He further stated that he lost the benefits of Proposition 13 when he moved, and as a result, his property tax has increased tremendously. Art Segers, 1294 W. 25th Street, San Bernardino, stated that if additional police officers are needed then it should be done by a police assessment district, not a street lighting and street sweeping assessment district. He suggested that the Police Department be given its own budget. Dave Schultz, representing the San Bernardino Valley Board of Real tors, stated that he is alarmed by the crime statistics in San Bernardino. He stated that there is need for improved police protection, but he is opposed to the method being proposed. He stated that the business people and the City are faced with a responsibility to the customer to provide a quality level of service. He stated that the Valley Board of Realtors offers their services to find ways and means of approaching the public and obtaining the funds the City desperately needs. Marvin Clarke, 2265 Denair, owner of Mt. Shadow Apartments, residence 431 Via Mesa Grande, Redondo Beach, objected to Assessment District No. 994 and stated that renters are affected by the tax as increased costs are passed on through higher rents. Mr. Clarke questioned why a middle-class person living in a one- bedroom apartment has to pay as much tax as a wealthy person living in a million dollar home. He suggested that people pay according to their assessed property value. Dean Geib, 4040 E. Piedmont Drive, representing Mt. Shadows Mobilehome Owners Association, spoke in opposition to the assessment district. He stated that he in support of additional police officers, but disagrees with the way the City is approaching the matter. Mr. Geib suggested that the need for additional police assistance be separated from the street lighting and street sweeping proposal. Dennis Delmar, resident of the north end of Arrowhead, stated that he is in support of the assessment district and stated that the need for additional police personnel is a problem of everyone who lives in the City. He stated it is important to support the police, and if it means paying an additional cost, then it is worth it. Jack Easton, 575 W. Bernardino Dental Clinic, assessment district. He 5th Street, businessman for the San stated the he is in support of this spoke regarding the crime incidents 6 6/27/90 that have recently occurred in his immediate area and stated that because the crime rate is increasing, there is a need for additional police officers. Cruz Martinez, 807 W. 23rd Street, expressed concern regarding the request for additional police. He stated that he was protesting the issuance of a liquor license in his area, but the Police Department reported that crime in this area was low and that a liquor license could be issued. He also asked why if the crime rate is low are the additional funds being requested for police officers? Theresa Alcorn, 6238 N. Indigo, commended the Police Department for doing an excellent job under the circumstances. She suggested that this be called a police assessment district, not a street lighting and street sweeping district. She also suggested that this additional tax be determined by a vote of the people. Donald C. Roessler, 165 Plymouth Way, Vice-President of the West Colony Community Association, spoke in opposition to Assessment District No. 994. He complained about the services provided by the various City departments and suggested that the City work on improving these services. Helen Kopczynski, 8150 N. Cable Canyon, objected to this assessment district. She stated that it is being proposed this way to avoid taking it to the public for a majority vote. She stated that no matter what the City calls the assessment district, it is an additional tax that will go on forever. Evelyn Fry, 546 W. 5th Street, representing the Chamber of Commerce, stated that the Chamber of Commerce realizes that there is a need to improve police protection and City beautification, but is opposed to the way it is being approached. Ms. Fry stated that the Chamber of Commerce is in support of additional police officers, but cannot support the method proposed. Elaine Shram, Roxbury Drive, spoke in support of the assessment district because of the need of additional police. She stated that she is a police volunteer and works with the neighborhood watch program for her area and is aware of the crimes occurring every day. Ms. Shram stated that the City needs to address this problem. Berneice Williams, 962 W. 10th Street, complained that the 900 block of 10th Street is not swept due to the parked cars on the street. She suggested that "no parking" signs be posted informing residents of the street sweeping, to allow parked vehicles to be removed. Ms. Williams stated that she has no objections to paying for the service or the City using the money for additional police, but that if she is going to pay for the service then she should receive the service. 7 6/27/90 Gil Bader, 1432 w. 31st Place, stated he has no problem with the proposed assessment district, and that he does receive street sweeping services from time to time, but it is not done properly because of the cars parked on the street. He suggested that "no parking" signs be posted informing residents of scheduled street sweeping to allow residents to move their vehicles. Raymond Coppenhagen, 780 E. 9th Street, Space 56, objected to Assessment District No. 994. He stated that at the mobilehome park where he resides, he does not have any street lighting or sweeping and does not need an additional tax. Faye Rodgers, 3396 Mt. View Avenue, representing the Senior Affairs Commission, spoke in support of Assessment District No. 994. Ms. Rodgers stated that the Senior Affairs Commission does regret that the proposed assessment district is not strictly for police. She stated there is a need for additional police and that the Commission appreciates the effort being made to increase police protection. Jesus Evangelisto, 1742 N. Buckeye Street, stated that he does not agree with the way the assessment district is being proposed, but realizes there is a need for additional police and is willing to pay the $48 per year additional tax. However, he suggests that the City explore a tax system where everyone pays the tax, not just the property owners. Elaine Hall, 2680 Highland Avenue, spoke in support of the proposed Assessment District No. 994. She stated that the crime rate is increasing every year and there is a need for additional police. John Hanna, 1731 Garden Drive, stated that he does not need the street sweeping services because of the sand and gravel on his street. He suggested that the needed funds for additional police be approached a different way. wade Byars, 269 S. "K" Street, stated that the additional tax should have been done differently. He suggested that the City impose a tax just for police services and felt it would be fully supported. Daniel Parker, 1649 Belle, questioned the amount of money needed for the additional police officers. He stated that he is in support of the police, but did not like the street lighting and street sweeping assessment district. Mr. Parker stated that if the tax were strictly for police services, he would support it. 8 6/27/90 Ruben Lopez, 631 W. 16th Street, spoke in support of Assessment District No. 994. He stated additional police, street lighting and street sweeping are needed, but the need for additional police should take first priority. John Bahr, Quail Canyon Road, spoke in support of the proposed assessment district, but questioned why it is being called a street lighting and street sweeping assessment district. Mr. Bahr stated that if the assessment district were proposed strictly for police, there would be no opposition. He also expressed concern about absentee landlords. Orville Moseley, 2826 Berkeley Court, stated that he petitioned property owners in his neighborhood and they were in support of additional police protection, but did not like the method being proposed. He stated that they preferred to vote on the matter. Pat Tyler, 2675 W. Second Street, No.5, representing the Foothill Villa Apartments, spoke in support of the additional police and street lighting. Ms. Tyler stated that the crime and gang problems need to be addressed now if the City does not deal with the problems now it can get out of hand. She further suggested that if people are concerned about the allocation of funds, they should see that is it spent right. Bud Long complained about being taxed for the assessment district, the single family rental ordinance, and other taxes he is required to pay. He suggested that the City seek another method for the additional police. James Wirth, 1980 Sierra Way, spoke in support of the assessment district and stated that the crime rate needs to be addressed. Mr. Wirth stated that the City Police Department's salary and fringe benefits need to be competitive with surrounding cities. Bill Katona, 1371 Walnut Street, stated that he realizes the need for additional police, but suggested that the City increase the utility tax to accomplish this. He suggested that the City not cover the use of the funds under street sweeping, but give the money directly to the Police Department, where it is deserved. Jim Lynas, 1160 E. Sonora, spoke in opposition and stated the City's first priority should be to find money for the Police Department without imposing a tax. Tony Ramos, 997 W. 15th Street, suggested that the street lighting and street sweeping be separated from the police. He objected to paying for a service he does not receive. He was 9 6/27/90 also concerned about refuse pickup. He stated that he is in support of the Police Department, but is opposed the way it is being proposed. Council Member Estrada, made a motion, seconded by Council Member Pope-Ludlam and unanimously carried, that the hearing be closed. Mayor Holcomb stated that some excellent points were discussed this evening that need to be addressed. He stated that there is nothing more important than the public's safety and well-being and that addressing the terrible crime and blight problem will be costly. He pointed out that the hearing conducted today was the most democratic method to use, as all citizens had an opportunity to express their view by letter or in person. Mayor Holcomb stated that he would have the City Engineer investigate the points discussed tonight on the mobilehome parks and self-contained communities to see if he can devise a formula that would be more equitable. The Mayor requested that the written protests received in the mail and heard today be totaled to obtain an accurate count on the number of protests received; and that this matter be continued to July 2, 1990, to allow the City Clerk's Office to compute the protests. Les Fogassy, Senior Real Property Specialist, answered questions regarding the deadline for the confirmation roll, stating that it must be done by July 16, 1990. If not, then the City would have to wait another year to have the assessment district in place. Council Member Minor made a motion, seconded by Council Member Pope-Ludlam and unanimously carried, that the resolution establishing Assessment District No. 994 be continued to the meeting of July 2, 1990, at 2:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. CHANGE ORDER NO. ONE - SECURITY PATROL IN PORTIONS OF HIGHLAND & ARDEN AREA - CONTINUED FROM JUNE 25, 1990 In a memorandum dated June 4, 1990, Roger G. Hardgrave, Director of Public Works/City Engineer, stated that Parker Protective Services and Investments Corp dba Blanket Security was awarded a contract to perform security services within the boundaries of Assessment District No. 990, in the Highland and Arden area. Change Order No. One extends the term of the contract from July 1, 1990 through June 30, 1991. The total contract price for the extended period, based upon the bid unit price of $15.41 is $45,397.20 which includes incidental costs. 10 6/27/90 Council Member pope-Ludlam made a motion, seconded by Council Member Estrada and unanimously carried, that Change Order No. One for the security services contract with Parker Protective Services in the Highland and Arden area be continued to Friday, June 29, 1990, at 1:30 p.m., in the Management Information Center, Sixth Floor, City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. ADJOURNMENT At 10:50 p.m., Mayor Holcomb adjourned the meeting to 1:30 p.m., Friday, June 29, 1990 in the Management Information Center, City Hall, Sixth Floor, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. SHAUNA CLARK City Clerk By -:JMcL tvJrkc!i~cLJ Deputy City Clerk No. of Items: 3 No. of Hours: 4 11 6/27/90