HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-01-1996 Minutes
MINUTES
MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 1, 1996
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
The regular meeting of the Mayor and Common Council of the
City of San Bernardino was called to order by Mayor Minor at 8:03
a.m., Monday, April 1, 1996, in the Council Chambers of City Hall,
300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California.
ROLL CALL
Roll call was taken by City Clerk Rachel Clark with the
following being present: Mayor Minor; Council Members Negrete,
Arias, Oberhelman, Devlin, Anderson, Miller; City Attorney Penman,
City Clerk Rachel Clark, City Administrator Shauna Clark. Absent:
Council Member Curlin.
City Attorney Penman announced that the following additional
case would be discussed in closed sess~on:
Samaan vs. Citv of San Bernardino. et al. - United States
District Court Case No. CV 93-0448 RAP (RMCx).
RECESS MEETING - CLOSED SESSION (I)
At 8:03 a.m., the Mayor and Common Council recessed to closed
session for the following:
Pursuant to Government Code Sections:
A. Conference with legal counsel existing litigation
pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (a):
Richard Smith vs. Citv of San Bernardino: Mark Klein -
San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. SCV 21835;
John Lee Bell vs. D. Keil. et al. United States
District Court Case No. CV 95-4231 WDK (JGx);
Citv of San Bernardino VS. Fireman's Fund San
Bernardino Superior Court Case No. 271849;
Peer vs. Ci tv of San Bernardino - San Bernardino Superior
Court Case No. 270179;
1
4/1/1996
Tomas Armendariz. et al. vs. James F. Penman. et al.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit No. 93-
55393; United States District Court Case No. CV 91-5757
CMB. (Continued from March 25, 1996.)
B. Conference with legal counsel - anticipated litigation -
significant exposure to litigation pursuant to
subdivision (b) of Government Code Section 54956.9: one
case.
C. Conference with legal counsel - anticipated litigation -
initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (c) of
Government Code Section 54956.9(c): one case.
CLOSED SESSION
At 8:03 a.m., Mayor Minor called the closed session to order
in the conference room of the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300
North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California.
ROLL CALL
Roll call was taken by City Clerk Rachel Clark with the
following being present: Mayor Minor; Council Members Negrete,
Arias, Oberhelman, Devlin, Anderson, Miller; City Attorney Penman,
City Clerk Rachel Clark, City Administrator Shauna Clark. Absent:
Council Member Curlin.
Also present: Senior Deputy City Attorney
City Attorney Easland, and Margaret Scroggin,
Operations Supervisor, City Attorney's Office.
Simmons, Deputy
Administrative
READING OF RESOLUTIONS & ORDINANCES
Deputy City Clerk Hartzel read the titles of all the
resolutions and ordinances on the regular, supplemental, and
addendum to the supplemental agendas of the Mayor and Common
Council and the regular agenda of the Community Development
Commission/San Bernardino Joint Powers Financing Authority and
Mayor and Common Council while the Council was in closed session.
COUNCIL MEMBER CURLIN ARRIVED
At 8:10 a.m., Council Member Curlin arrived at the closed
session.
SENIOR ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY CARLYLE ARRIVED
At 8:11 a.m., Senior Assistant City Attorney Carlyle arrived
at the closed session.
SENIOR DEPUTY
At 8:13 a.m.,
closed session.
CITY ATTORNEY SIMMONS EXCUSED
Senior Deputy City Attorney Simmons left the
2
4/1/1996
DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY EASLAND EXCUSED
At 8:14 a.m., Deputy City Attorney Easland left the closed
session.
DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY EMPENO & DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND
BUILDING SERVICES BOUGHEY ARRIVED
At 8:24 a.m., Deputy City Attorney Empeno and Director of
Planning and Building Services Boughey arrived at the closed
session.
ADJOURN CLOSED SESSION
At 8:57 a.m., the closed session adjourned to the regular
meeting of the Mayor and Common Council.
RECONVENE MEETING
At 9:03 a.m., Mayor Minor reconvened the regular meeting of
the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino in the
Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San
Bernardino, California.
ROLL CALL
Roll call was taken by city Clerk Rachel Clark with the
following being present: Mayor Minor; Council Members Negrete,
Curlin, Arias, Oberhelman, Devlin, Anderson, Miller; City Attorney
Penman, City Clerk Rachel Clark, City Administrator Shauna Clark.
Absent: None.
INVOCATION
The invocation was given by Reverend Paul Reinhard, Calvary
Baptist Church.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The pledge of allegiance was led by Council Member Devlin.
ANNOUNCEMENTS - MAYOR MINOR
(3)
Mayor Minor acknowledged the presence in the audience of
students from the San Bernardino Adult School and their instructor,
Mrs. Cody.
APPOINTMENTS - COUNCIL MEMBERS ARIAS & ANDERSON
(2, Sl & S2)
COUNCIL MEMBER ARIAS - THIRD WARD
Senior Affairs Commission -
Marilyn E. Leidner
(Note:
Commission,
The appointment of Thomas G. Cervantes to the Fire
as requested by Council Member Arias, was withdrawn.)
3
4/1/1996
COUNCIL MEMBER ANDERSON - SIXTH WARD
Human Relations Commission -
Planning Commission -
Senior Affairs Commission -
Juanita H. Scott
Evelyn J. Lockett
Precious Wesley
Council Member Oberhelman made a motion, seconded by Council
Member Devlin, and unanimously carried, that the appointments
requested by Council Members Arias and Anderson be approved.
Precious Wesley accepted her certificate of appointment.
COMMENDATION - CATHY DE MAIO - SAN BERNARDINO VISITORS &
CONVENTION BUREAU - MISS SAN BERNARDINO PAGEANT (2A)
J. Lorraine Velarde, Executive Assistant to the Mayor, read a
resolution commending Cathy DeMaio of the San Bernardino Visitors
and Convention Bureau for her outstanding efforts in coordinating
the Miss San Bernardino Pageant.
Cathy DeMaio accepted her commendation.
RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT
PERFORMANCE COMPUTING
SUPERCOMPUTING CALIFORNIA
BERNARDINO
REGIONAL CENTER OF HIGH
INSTITUTE OF APPLIED
STATE UNIVERSITY, SAN
(2B)
J. Lorraine Velarde, Executive Assistant to the Mayor, read a
resolution of the Mayor and Common Council supporting the
establishment of a regional center of high performance computing
through the Institute of Applied Supercomputing at California State
University, San Bernardino.
Dr. Judith Rymer, Vice
California State University,
resolution on behalf of President
who have worked on this project.
Preside~t, University Relations,
San Bernardino, accepted the
Evans and her faculty colleagues
RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT - NOVEMBER 1996 INITIATIVE - LOCAL
CONTROL AND RESPONSIBILITY ACT - SAN BERNARDINO PUBLIC
EMPLOYEES' ASSOCIATION (SBPEA) (2C)
City Administrator Shauna Clark submitted a Staff Report dated
March 25, 1996, regarding a resolution supporting the Local Control
and Fiscal Responsibility Act, a proposed November 1996 Initiative
designed to recover a significant portion of the property tax
losses in the City of San Bernardino; and requesting that said
resolution be presented to the San Bernardino Public Employees'
Association.
4
4/1/1996
Council Member Oberhelman made a motion, seconded by Council
Member Miller, and unanimously carried, that the resolution in
support of the Local Control and Fiscal Responsibility Act be
approved; and that said resolution be presented to the San
Bernardino Public Employees' Association.
The resolution was accepted
representatives of the San
Association, who noted that the
first City to support this act.
by John Tucker and Jim Hamlin,
Bernardino Public Employees'
City of San Bernardino was the
PROCLAMATION - NATIONAL RECORDS & INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
DAY - APRIL 2, 1996 (2D)
J. Lorraine Velarde, Executive Assistant to the Mayor, read a
proclamation declaring April 2, 1996, as National Records and
Information Management Day in the City of San Bernardino.
Melanie Miller, Deputy
Management Coordinator,
proclamation.
City Clerk, and Myra Lazio, Records
Water Department, accepted the
PROCLAMATION
APRIL 1-7, 1996
NATIONAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WEEK
(2E)
J. Lorraine Velarde, Executive Assistant to the Mayor, read a
proclamation declaring April 1-7, 1996, as National Community
Development Week in the City of San Bernardino.
Dave Larsen, Section Chief, Economic Development Department,
County of San Bernardino, accepted the proclamation.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS TO CITY & OTHERS THANKS &
APPRECIATION FOR THEIR SUPPORT - U.S. MARINE CORPS(2F)
Master Sergeant Harkley of the U. S. Marine Corps (USMC)
announced that the USMC Reserves were being relocated to March Air
Force Base, and he and Captain Todd Zink wanted to express their
appreciation and thanks to the City of San Bernardino and certain
key individuals who had supported the USMC Reserves while they were
located at the former Norton Air Force Base. The following were
recognized with letters, certificates, and/or plaques of
appreciation by Master Sergeant Harkley and Captain zink:
The Economic Development Agency, whose award was accepted by
Agency Administrator Timothy Steinhaus;
Lois 0' Donnell of the San
recognition of their work with
for Tots Program;
Bernardino Children's Fund in
children--particularly the Toys
5
4/1/1996
Dr. Clarence R. Goodwin of the San Bernardino City Unified
School District;
Annie Ramos, Director, and Aaliyah Abdullah,
Westside Community Service Center, Parks,
Community Services; and
Manager of the
Recreation and
Mayor Minor, who was presented with a certificate of
appreciation and a plaque dedica~ed to the citizens of San
Bernardino for their faithful support over the last 50 years.
Mayor Minor presented City pins to Master Sergeant Harkley and
Captain Todd Zink.
ANNOUNCEMENTS - CITY CLERK RACHEL CLARK
(3)
City Clerk Rachel Clark expressed best wishes to
Lalo and Angie Mendoza, in recognition of their
anniversary.
her parents,
51st wedding
ANNOUNCEMENTS - CITY ATTORNEY PENMAN
(3)
City Attorney Penman expressed appreciation to the Civic Light
Opera for the James Whitmore performance of "Will Rogers."
PUBLIC COMMENTS - CAJON HIGH SCHOOL REPRESENTATIVES
(4)
Alice Little, Melissa Campbell, Mary Saphyakhajon, Jennifer
Solis, and Jim Morgan, students at Cajon High School, 1200 Hill
Drive, San Bernardino, CA, and their instructor, Donna Conant,
expressed support for IT DAY (International Togetherness), a
celebration of unity through diversity presented by Cajon High
School in conjunction with area churches and other community
groups, and invited everyone to attend the celebration on Sunday,
April 28, 1996, noon to 6:00 p.m. at Court Street Square, Court and
E Streets, San Bernardino, California.
PUBLIC COMMENTS - RUBEN LOPEZ
(4)
Ruben Lopez, 631 W. 16th Street, San Bernardino, CA, expressed
agreement with some of the proposed Charter changes, advocated
leaving the Mayor and City Attorney positions as they now exist,
and commented on the City's General Plan.
City Attorney Penman noted that the housing portion of the
General Plan must be updated every five years, but this does not
apply to the rest of the plan. He added that the General plan is
currently up to date and not in violation of any law.
6
4/1/1996
WAIVE FULL READING OF RESOLUTIONS & ORDINANCES (5)
Council Member Curlin made a motion, seconded by Council
Member Oberhelman, and unanimously carried, that full reading of
the resolutions and ordinances on the regular, supplemental and
addendum to the supplemental agendas of the Mayor and Common
Council, be waived.
COUNCIL MINUTES
(6)
Council Member Curlin made a motion, seconded by Council
Member Oberhelman, and unanimously carried, that the minutes of the
following meeting of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of
San Bernardino be approved as submitted in typewritten form: March
25, 1996.
AUTHORIZE & ACCEPT PAYMENT OF INSuRANCE PREMIUM IN LIEU
OF RENTAL FEES - USE OF FDR BOWL - PERRIS HILL PARK -
JUNIOR UNIVERSITY (9)
Annie Ramos, Director of Parks, Recreation and Community
Services, submitted a Staff Report dated February 27, 1996,
regarding a request from Junior University to accept the premium
costs of a $1 million liability policy in lieu of rental fees for
the use of the FDR Bowl in perris Hill Park for their summer
theater.
Council Member Curlin made a motion, seconded by Council
Member Oberhelman, and unanimously carried, that the Mayor and
Common Council authorize the acceptance of payment of insurance
premium by Junior University in lieu of rental fees for use of FDR
Bowl at perris Hill Park.
RES. 96-74 - RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO APPROVING THE EXECUTION OF
AN AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES WITH
RITA CORONADO FOR MENTORING COORDINATOR SERVICES. (10)
ORD. MC-964 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
AMENDING CHAPTER 8.27 OF THE SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL
CODE PERTAINING TO NUISANCES. (Lots with vacant and/or
boarded up structures) Final (11)
RES. 96-75 - RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
CONFIRMING COSTS OF ABATEMENT OF PUBLIC NUISANCES AND
IMPOSING LIENS ON CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN
THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO FOR THE COSTS OF THE
ABATEMENT. (12)
7
4/1/1996
RES. 96-76 - RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
AWARDING A CONTRACT TO LAIRD CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC.
FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF MILL STREET
AND PEPPER AVENUE. (15)
Council Member Curlin made a motion, seconded by Council
Member Oberhelman, that said resolutions and ordinance be adopted.
Resolution Nos. 96-74, 96-75, 96-76 and Ordinance No. MC-964
were adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members
Negrete, Curlin, Arias, Oberhelman, Devlin, Anderson, Miller.
Nays: None. Absent: None.
APPROVE PLAN NO. 9470 - REHABILITATE PAVEMENT -
OF UNIVERSITY PARKWAY, WATERMAN AVENUE & MILL
AUTHORIZE ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS
PORTIONS
STREET -
(16)
Roger Hardgrave, Director of Public Works/City Engineer,
submitted a Staff Report dated March 18, 1996, regarding approval
of plans and authorization to advertise for bids for rehabilitation
of pavement on University Parkway, from I-215 to College Avenue;
Waterman Avenue, from 16th Street to Highland Avenue; and Mill
Street, from Sierra Way to Waterman Avenue.
Council Member Curlin made a motion, seconded by Council
Member Oberhelman, and unanimously carried, that the plans for
rehabilitating the pavement on University Parkway, from I-215 to
college Avenue; Waterman Avenue, from 16th Street to Highland
Avenue; and Mill Street, from Sierra Way to Waterman Avenue, in
accordance with Plan No. 9470, be approved; and that the Director
of Public Works/City Engineer be authorized to advertise for bids.
APPROVE PLAN NO. 9475 - INSTALL SEWER MAIN - PALM MEADOWS
DRIVE, FROM GIFFORD AVENUE TO MT. VIEW AVENUE - AUTHORIZE
ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS (17)
Roger Hardgrave, Director of Public Works/City Engineer,
submitted a Staff Report dated March 19, 1996, regarding approval
of plans and authorization to advertise for bids for installation
of a sewer main in Palm Meadows Drive, from Gifford Avenue to Mt.
View Avenue.
Council Member Curlin made a motion, seconded by Council
Member Oberhelman, and unanimously carried, that the plans for
installation of a sewer main in Palm Meadows Drive, from Gifford
Avenue to Mt. View Avenue, in accordance with Plan No. 9475, be
approved; and that the Director of Public Works/City Engineer be
authorized to advertise for bids.
8
4/1/1996
RES. 96-77 - RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
CONFIRMING COST OF ABATEMENTS AND IMPOSING LIENS ON
CERTAIN PARCELS OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY
OF SAN BERNARDINO FOR THE COSTS OF THE ABATEMENT OF
PUBLIC NUISANCES. (Building Abatements) (7)
Council Member Oberhelman made a motion, seconded by Council
Member Devlin, that said resolution be adopted; and that the City
Clerk be authorized to administratively remove any properties from
Exhibit A which have been paid. (Note: There was no vote taken.)
Discussion ensued relative to finding some method which would
expedite payment from government agencies.
Council Member Negrete made a substitute motion, seconded by
Council Member Curlin, that said resolution be adopted; that the
City Clerk be authorized to administratively remove any properties
from Exhibit A which have been paid; and that the Legislative
Review Committee be directed to research possible avenues which
would make the payment of the fees at the time of service more
attractive, rather than going to lien.
The motion carried, and Resolution No. 96-77
the following vote: Ayes: Council Members Negrete,
Oberhelman, Devlin, Anderson, Miller. Nays: None.
was adopted by
Curlin, Arias,
Absent: None.
RES. 96-78 - RESOLUTION OF
APPROVING THE DESTRUCTION
FINANCE DEPARTMENT.
THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
OF CERTAIN RECORDS BY THE
(8)
Discussion ensued regarding the wisdom of destroying City
records, especially records from the Water Department.
City Attorney Penman assured Council that his office had
signed off on this matter.
Council Member Miller made a mction, seconded by Council
Member Anderson, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. 96-78 was adopted by the following vote:
Council Members Negrete, Curlin, A~'ias, Oberhelman,
Anderson, Miller. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Devlin,
CLAIMS AND PAYROLL
(13)
Council Member Miller made a motion, seconded by Council
Member Anderson, and unanimously carried, that the claims and
payroll and authorization to issue warrants as listed on the
memorandum dated March 21, 1996, from the Director of Finance, be
approved.
9
4/1/1996
PERSONNEL ACTIONS - (Discussed later in the meeting - See
page ll) (14)
Council questioned whether the Abatement Aide position was a
new position and why a Tree Trimmer was being promoted when the
decision had been made to eliminate the tree trimming positions by
attrition.
City Administrator Shauna Clark explained that the tree
trimmer position in question is the person who administers the
contract with West Coast Arborists, performing duties similar to a
contract administrator; therefore, the justification for a Tree
Trimmer II. These duties were previously performed by the arborist
(a much higher paid individual), but he no longer has the time to
handle the contract administration due to his many duties in the
field.
Council expressed concern regarding the approval of any new
positions prior to addressing the fiscal year 1996/1997 budget, and
it was the consensus of the Mayor and Council that the matter be
discussed later in the meeting when Assistant City Administrator
Fred Wilson would be available to answer some of their concerns.
APPEAL HEARING - BOARD OF BUILDING COMMISSIONERS' ORDER
NO. 2934 - 1371 WEST BASE LINE STREET - FRANK GARCIA, JR.
(Continued from March 4, 1996) (l8)
Al Boughey, Director of Planning and Building Services,
submitted a Staff Report dated March 21, 1996, which included a
synopsis of previous Council actions relative to Mr. Garcia's
appeal.
Joe Lease, Inspection Services Supervisor, Planning and
Building Services, stated he had met with Mr. Garcia following the
Council meeting of March 4 and explained to him what needed to be
done to bring the property into compliance. He added that Mr.
Garcia still needs to submit plans and obtain final approval. He
noted that the costs incurred by the City have been incurred for
quite some time and recommended denying Mr. Garcia's appeal for
waiver of the fees.
Frank Garcia, 8335 Mediterranean Way, Sacramento, CA, stated
that the reason the remainder of the work had not been completed
was because of the time it takes to proceed through "the process"
required by the City.
Council Member Negrete made a motion, seconded by Council
Member Oberhelman, that Council deny the appeal (for waiver of
fees) and extend by 60 days the time allowed Mr. Garcia to complete
Code Enforcement's requirements.
10
4/1/1996
Mr. Lease noted that all requirements for bringing the
property up to code had been provided to Mr. Garcia in the original
Notice and Order sent to him in August 1995.
Council Member Devlin made a substitute motion, seconded by
Council Member Oberhelman, to deny the appeal.
Council Member Devlin amended his substitute motion, seconded
by Council Member Oberhelman, and unanimously carried, that the
hearing be closed; and that the Mayor and Common Council uphold
Order No. 2934 of the Board of Building Commissioners and deny the
appeal.
PERSONNEL ACTIONS
See page lO)
{Discussed earlier in the meeting -
(14)
Fred Wilson, Assistant City Administrator, explained that the
Abatement Aide and Tree Trimmer II positions are currently in the
budget, and the only change would be the difference in salary
between a Tree Trimmer and a Tree Trimmer II, as the Tree Trimmer
position would not be filled.
Council Member Oberhelman made a motion, seconded by Council
Member Negrete, that the personnel actions submitted by the Chief
Examiner dated March 20, 1996, 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,
except for Item No. One, Abatement Aide. (Note: There was no vote
taken on this motion.)
Discussion ensued regarding the duties of the Abatement Aide
position and the budgetary implications of filling said position.
It was noted that the Abatement Aide would be doing the equivalent
of code enforcement work and would be assigned throughout the city.
City Administrator Shauna Clark pointed out that one of the
things on this agenda (Item No. 11), which Council had just
approved, was a new ordinance which would allow the weed abatement
people to establish a procedure to do regular weed abatement on
structures that have gone through the Board of Building
Commissioners' process and have been boarded up, but no one has
taken care of the yards or the lots. Therefore, some additional
tasks would be acquired which would differ from the weed abatement
process performed on vacant lots, which is very well routinized and
mechanized. She added that this position would support the City's
beautification efforts.
Council Member Negrete removed his second.
The motion failed for lack of a second.
11
4/1/1996
Jim Howell, Director of Public Services, explained that this
person would not be doing actual abatement work, but would be the
"eyes" in the field, making hundreds of inspections and issuing
work orders to the abatement contractors.
Council Member Anderson made a motion, seconded by Council
Member Arias, that the personnel actions submitted by the Chief
Examiner dated March 20, 1996, in accordance with Civil Service
Rules and Personnel Policies adopted by the Mayor and Common
Council of the City of San Bernardino, be approved and ratified.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Members Curlin, Arias, Devlin, Anderson, Miller.
Members Negrete, Oberhelman. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Nays:
Council
Council
PUBLIC HEARING ESTABLISH ADMINISTRATIVE
DEVELOPMENT FEE DEFERRALS
FEE FOR
(19)
Al Boughey, Director of Planning and Building Services,
submitted a Staff Report dated March 19, 1996, recommending
adoption of a resolution which would establish an administrative
fee when a developer applies for the deferral of certain
development fees.
Mayor Minor opened the hearing.
Al Boughey, Director of Planning and Building Services,
indicated that Page 1, Line 18 of the resolution should be changed
to read that the administrative fee is to be paid "at the time of
payment of the deferred fees", rather than "prior to the deferral
of any of such fees."
RES. 96-79 - RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ADOPTING AN ADMINISTRATIVE
FEE FOR THE DEFERRAL OF CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT FEES. (19)
Council Member Miller made a mction, seconded by Council
Member Curlin that the hearing be closed; and that said resolution
be adopted, with Page 1, Line 18 of the resolution amended to read,
"... .to be paid at the time of payment of the deferred fees."
The motion carried, and Resolution No. 96-79
the following vote: Ayes: Council Members Negrete,
Oberhelman, Devlin, Anderson, Miller. Nays: None.
was adopted by
Curlin, Arias,
Absent: None.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTION OF A LEASE WITH PACIFIC BELL MOBILE SERVICES,
RELATING TO CERTAIN CITY-OWNED REAL PROPERTY SITUATED AT
THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECOND STREET AND MERIDIAN AVENUE
(A PORTION OF NICHOLSON PARK). (Discussed later in the
meeting - See page 17) (20)
12
4/1/1996
Council Member Oberhelman made a motion that said resolution
be adopted.
The motion failed for lack of a second.
City Attorney Penman stated that his office had refused to
sign off on this lease agreement due to the fact that on page 8 of
the agreement the City would be agreeing to indemnify Pacific Bell
Mobile Services for Pacific Bell's own operations. He stated that
normally each agency agrees that they will be responsible for their
own operations and problems. He added that his office had proposed
three changes to the agreement, and Pacific Bell had agreed to only
one of these changes. The other two changes involved the issues of
liability and indemnification. (Note: A revised version of the
lease agreement was distributed to Council and staff by the City
Attorney's Office.)
Concern was expressed
connected with erecting a
base, which would be an
children.
by Council regarding the liability
60-foot pole with a 20-inch diameter
attraction and potential hazard to
Roger Hardgrave, Director of Public Works/City Engineer, noted
that there are many poles throughout the City; adding that the
proposed pole is smooth, with no handholds, and would be surrounded
by a 6-foot chain link fence.
Council Member Devlin made a motion, seconded by Council
Member Anderson, to deny the resolution. (Note: There was no vote
taken. )
At Mayor Minor's suggestion, Allen Reese, representing Pacific
Bell Mobile Services, agreed to meet with the City Attorney's
Office during the lunch break to discuss possible areas of concern
and changes to the language of the contract, including designation
of fencing material.
It was the consensus of Council and staff that the matter be
considered later in the meeting.
ORD. MC-96S - AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN
BERNARDINO ADDING SUBSECTION C TO SECTION 8.60.120 OF THE
SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO FIREWORKS IN
HIGH FIRE AREAS IN THE 1996 SEASON. Urqency (26)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN
SUBSECTION C TO SECTION 8.60.120 OF
MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO FIREWORKS
IN THE 1996 SEASON. First
BERNARDINO ADDING
THE SAN BERNARDINO
IN HIGH FIRE AREAS
(AS1)
13
4/1/1996
Mayor Minor stated that adoption of the urgency ordinance
would allow fireworks at the Stampede's opening baseball game at
Fiscalini Field on April 13, 1996.
City Attorney Penman stated his office could not determine
sufficiency for an urgency ordinance, and that the ordinance in
Agenda Item No. ASl would cover all the dates that fireworks would
be used at the Fiscalini Field except the April 13 date.
Council Member Oberhelman made a motion, seconded by council
Member Miller, that said urgency ordinance be adopted; and that
said ordinance be laid over for final adoption.
The motion carried, and urgency Ordinance No. MC-965 was
adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members Negrete,
Curlin, Arias, Oberhelman, Devlin, Anderson, Miller. Nays: None.
Absent: None.
RECESS MEETING
At 11:05 a.m., Mayor Minor declared a five-minute recess.
RECONVENE MEETING
At 11:11 a.m., Mayor Minor reconvened the regular meeting of
the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino in the
Council Chambers of City Hall, 30J North "D" Street, San
Bernardino, California.
ROLL CALL
Roll call was taken by City Clerk Rachel Clark with the
following being present: Mayor Minor; Council Members Negrete,
Curlin, Arias, Oberhelman, Devlin, Anderson, Miller; Senior
Assistant City Attorney Barlow, Economic Development Agency Special
Counsel Timothy Sabo, City Clerk Rachel Clark, Economic Development
Agency Administrator Timothy Steinhaus. Absent: None.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION/SAN BERNARDINO JOINT
POWERS FINANCING AUTHORITY - JOINT REGULAR MEETING
At 11:11 a.m., Chairman Minor called the joint regular meeting
of the Community Development Commission/ San Bernardino Joint Powers
Financing Authority and Mayor and Common Council to order in the
Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San
Bernardino, California.
NOTE: The items reflected within the Community Development
Commission portion of the minutes are those items which require
action by the Mayor and Common Council. Therefore, action taken
relative to Items R1, R2, R4, RS, R6, R7, R11, R12, and R13 will
not be annotated. Minutes of the action taken on Community
Development Commission items are prepared and distributed
separately by the Economic Development Agency.
14
4/1/1996
WAIVE FULL READING OF RESOLUTIONS & ORDINANCES (R3)
Council Member Oberhelman made a motion, seconded by Council
Member Devlin, and unanimously carried, that full reading of the
resolutions and ordinances on the regular agenda of the Community
Development Commission/San Bernardino Joint Powers Financing
Authority and Mayor and Common Council, be waived.
RES. 96-80 - RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING
AND DIRECTING THE EXECUTION OF CONSENT TO FINANCING OF
HOTEL PROPERTY, CERTIFICATES OF COMPLIANCE AND ESTOPPEL
CERTIFICATE (FOSTER HOTELS) . (R8B)
Council Member Oberhelman made a motion, seconded by Council
Member Negrete, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. 96-80 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes:
Council Members Negrete, Curlin, Arias, Oberhelman, Devlin,
Anderson, Miller. Nays: None. Absen~: None.
PUBLIC HEARING ISSUANCE OF REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
VARIABLE RATE DEMAND MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REVENUE BONDS -
SERIES 1996 - SILVERWOOD PARK APARTMENTS PROJECT - $7
MILLION (R9)
Ronald Winkler, Development Director, Economic Development
Agency, submitted a Staff Report dated March 27, 1996, regarding
the Silverwood Park Apartments Project and the owners' intent to
convert the conventional financing to tax-exempt bond financing and
finance the costs of rehabilitation with the assistance of the
Agency.
Mayor Minor opened the hearing.
Development Director Winkler gave an overview of past actions
and staff's recommendation regarding the issuance of Redevelopment
Agency variable rate demand multifamily housing revenue bonds in
the amount of $7 million.
Council noted that the project proposes to rehabilitate
approximately 328 existing units, which provide housing for low-
and moderate-income families; not the construction of new units.
RES. 96-81 - RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO REGARDING THE HOLDING OF A
PUBLIC HEARING IN CONNECTION WITH THE ISSUANCE OF THE
$7,000,000 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SAN
BERNARDINO VARIABLE RATE DEMAND MULTIFAMILY HOUSING
REVENUE BONDS (SILVERWOODS APARTYIENTS PROJECT) SERIES
1996. (R9B)
15
4/1/1996
Council Member Oberhelman made
Member Negrete, that the public
resolution be adopted.
a ~otion, seconded by Council
hearing be closed and said
The motion carried, and Resolution No. 96-81 was adopted by
the following vote: Ayes: Council Members Negrete, Curlin, Arias,
Oberhelman, Devlin, Anderson, Miller. Nays: None. Absent: None.
FINANCING
AUTHORITY
SAN BERNARDINO
INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
(RlO)
Timothy Steinhaus, Economic Development Agency Administrator,
submitted a Staff Report dated March 27, 1996, regarding financing
of public improvement projects to enhance vehicular access to the
aviation portions of the former Nortcn Air Force Base (the San
Bernardino International Airport [SBD]) and to upgrade the aviation
facilities located at the SBD Airport.
RES. 96-82 - RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINC, CALIFORNIA, MAKING
FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS AS TO THE BENEFIT OF CERTAIN
IMPROVEMENTS IN THE VARIOUS REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS
OF THE AGENCY. (RlOA)
Council Member Oberhelman made a l'lotion, seconded by Council
Member Devlin, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. 96-82 was adopted by the following vote:
Council Members Negrete, Curlin, Arias, Oberhelman,
Anderson, Miller. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Devlin,
NOTE: The resolution title as shown on the agenda and in the
Staff Report stated, " Improvements in the Inland Valley
Development Agency Proj ect Area H; however, the title of the
finalized resolution was worded as shown above.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION/SAN BERNARDINO JOINT
POWERS FINANCING AUTHORITY - JOINT REGULAR MEETING
At this time, the Mayor and Common Council, acting as the
Community Development Commission, took action on Community
Development Commission items.
RECESS MEETING
At 12:14 p.m., Mayor Minor recessed the joint regular meeting
of the Community Development Commission/ San Bernardino Joint Powers
Financing Authority and Mayor and Common Council until 2: 00 p. m. in
the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San
Bernardino, California.
16
4/1/1996
RECONVENE MEETING
At 2:02 p.m., Mayor Minor reconvened the regular meeting of
the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino in the
Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San
Bernardino, California.
ROLL CALL
Roll call was taken
following being present:
Curlin, Arias, Oberhelman,
Penman, City Clerk Rachel
Absent: None.
by City Clerk Rachel Clark with the
Mayor Minor; Council Members Negrete,
Devlin, Anderson, Miller; City Attorney
Clark, City Administrator Shauna Clark.
Res. 96-83 - RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A LEASE WITH PACIFIC BELL
MOBILE SERVICES, RELATING TO CE?TAIN CITY -OWNED REAL
PROPERTY SITUATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECOND
STREET AND MERIDIAN AVENUE (A PORT=ON OF NICHOLSON PARK)
(Discussed earlier in the meeting - See page 12) (20)
City Attorney Penman stated that Pacific Bell Mobile Services
had agreed to indemnify the City for their negligence and the City
would indemnify Pacific Bell for its negligence. He added that
currently Pacific Bell is not self-insured; therefore they have
agreed to name the City as an additional insured. Should they
become self-insured prior to commencement of the contract, they
will provide the City with proof of their self-insurance. He
stated his office was now satisfied with the agreement.
Responding to an inquiry from Council, Allen Reese,
representing Pacific Bell Mobile Services, stated that the lease
document does not specify the material to be used to fence the
facility and the decision would be made during the Planning
approval process. However, if the City would prefer wrought iron
rather than chain link, that would be acceptable to Pacific Bell.
Council Member Negrete made a motion, seconded by Council
Member Oberhelman, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. 96-83 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes:
Council Members Negrete, Curlin, Arias, Oberhelman, Anderson,
Miller. Nays: Council Member Devlin. Absent: None.
CITY ADMINISTRATOR SHAUNA CLARK EXCUSED
At 2: 06 p. m., City Administrator Shauna Clark left the Council
meeting and was replaced by Director of Planning and Building
Services Boughey and Associate planner Finn.
17
4/1/1996
PUBLIC HEARING - DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 91-01 - EXPAND
EXISTING INLAND CENTER MALL - ADJACENT TO INLAND CENTER
DRIVE & DIRECTLY NORTHEAST OF I -215 - GENERAL GROWTH
MANAGEMENT, INC. (Note: This item was continuously
discussed on pages 18 through 38.) (29)
Al Boughey, Director of Planning and Building Services,
submitted a Staff Report dated March 21, 1996, regarding
Development Agreement No. 91-01, a request to expand the existing
Inland Center Mall.
Director Boughey gave an overview of the proposed project,
explained the resolutions the Council was being asked to adopt, and
introduced the staff members involved in the project, as follows:
Mike Finn, Project Planner, Planning and Building Services, and
Chuck Bell, a staff environmental consultant, considered an
extension to City staff on this project, who were responsible for
bringing the project together; Mike Grubbs, Senior Civil Engineer,
and Anwar Wagdy, City Traffic Engineer, Public Works/Engineering.
Mike Finn, Associate Planner, described the proposed project
area and provided a synopsis of the proposed development agreement.
Chuck Bell, P.O. Box 193, Lucerne Valley, CA, project
consultant, presented a chronological review and summary of the
Environmental Impact Report process used by City staff on this
project.
Mike Grubbs, Senior civil Engineer, discussed the
environmental summary relative to geology, and noted that
liquefaction studies would be required on the Inland Center Mall's
proposed expansion plan as stipulated within Ordinance No. MC-676.
He stated that proper structural engineering methods are in place
which can be used to mitigate any impacts from liquefaction, and
staff believes this is a design issue rather than an environmental
concern.
Anwar Wagdy, City Traffic Engineer, stated that the Inland
Center Mall traffic study was carefully developed with input from
staff, San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG), Southern
California Association of Governments (SCAG), and the consulting
firm of Kaku Associates, Inc., 1453 Third Street, Suite 400, Santa
Monica, CA. It was studied and reviewed several times, and staff
considers the traffic study to be adequate and agrees with its
contents.
Director Boughey stated that staff recommends approval of this
development agreement, and asked that the project be viewed not as
a battle between two malls, but as San Bernardino competing against
the balance of the Inland Empire for high quality retail services,
expanded employment opportunities, an expanded revenue base, and a
means to encourage additional redevelopment in the city.
18
4/1/1996
RECESS MEETING
At 2:59 p.m., Mayor Minor declared a five-minute recess.
RECONVENE MEETING
At 3:07 p.m., Mayor Minor reconvened the regular meeting of
the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino in the
Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San
Bernardino, California.
ROLL CALL
Roll call was taken by City Clerk Rachel Clark with the
following being present: Mayor Minor; Council Members Negrete,
Curlin, Arias, Oberhelman, Devlin, Anderson, Miller; Senior
Assistant City Attorney Carlyle, City Clerk Rachel Clark, Director
of Planning and Building Services Boughey, Associate Planner Finn.
Absent: None.
PUBLIC HEARING - DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 91-01 -
EXISTING INLAND CENTER MALL - ADJACENT TO INLAND
DRIVE & DIRECTLY NORTHEAST OF I215 - GENERAL
MANAGEMENT, INC.
EXPAND
CENTER
GROWTH
(29)
Mayor Minor opened the public hearing.
Mark Ostoich, Law Offices of Gresham, Varner, Savage, Nolan,
& Tilden, 600 N. Arrowhead Avenue, San Bernardino, CA, representing
Inland Center Mall, stated that the General Plan encourages
development of intensified retail at Inland Center Mall as well as
Carousel Mall, but there is not a clear-cut procedure for obtaining
conceptual approval of a large-scale, multi-phase commercial
project; however, there is a very clear procedure for all of the
components of the project. This, there:ore, was the genesis of the
development agreement, which in fact is nothing more than a
procedural tool to set the framework for the ultimate development
of the Inland Center. Mr. Ostoich reiterated that the agreement
provides for two phases of the development proj ect, and the
development code is to be strictly adhered to. He stated that the
applicant is seeking no financial assistance from the City for this
project, and noted that the City had asked the applicant to
indemnify the City, and they are completely agreeable to this. He
stated that the ultimate resolution of the Inland Center Mall and
the Carousel Mall development in the future will be determined by
the market and economic forces.
Arun Parmar, General Manager, General Growth Management of
California, Inc., Inland Center, 500 Inland Center Drive, San
Bernardino, CA, explained the imminent threat to the Inland Center
Mall by the development of surrounding malls in Redlands and
Ontario. He stated that no negotiations with new department stores
can continue without this agreement. Mr. Parmar submitted to City
Clerk Rachel Clark a notebook entitled, "Inland Center Mall
Expansion prepared for the San Bernardino City Council."
19
4/1/1996
Stephen Furst, President, Chief Operating Officer,
Gottschalks, Inc., P.O. Box 28920, Fresno, CA, expressed full
support of the expansion of the Inland Center Mall, stating that
opportunities would be lost to Redlands and other surrounding
communities if Inland Center Mall does not move ahead.
Steven Partridge, vice President, Equitable Real Estate,
Lakeside Square at Park Avenue, 12377 Merit Drive, Suite 1400,
Dallas, TX, stated that San Bernardino has two malls on life
support at the present time and stressed the necessity of being
proactive in the retail environment. He noted that within 10
years, 20-30 percent of the malls as we now know them will be
obsolete.
Tom Dodson, Tom Dodson and Associates, 463 N. Sierra Way, San
Bernardino, CA, City Environmental Consultant, stated that the
Council needed to do two things: 1) Consider the merits of the
project and whether it should go forward, and 2) Decide whether
they have enough information to make an informed decision to
certify the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) He advised the
Mayor and Council on the merits of the EIR, explained the EIR
process, and addressed the opponents' concerns. He noted that the
agencies responsible for determining that the studies contained in
the EIR were adequate have done so.
At torney Ostoich presented closing remarks, saying that he
found it particularly upsetting that the opponents' motivations,
although wrapped in the banner of California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) compliance, were actually anti-competitive motivations
driven by the desire on the part of one mall to prevent a
competitor from competing. He referred to the full-page "Open
Letter to the Citizens and Business People of San Bernardino" paid
for by the Central City Company and Carousel Mall Merchants
Association and printed in The San Bernardino County Sun on Sunday,
March 31, 1996; and submitted said letter to City Clerk Rachel
Clark.
Note: As a reference for comments later in the meeting, the
letter presents a "win-win scenario" proposal, which included two
items, as follows:
1. The planned multi-screen cinema complex must be allowed to
go forward downtown and should be removed from the Inland Center
development agreement; and
2. The City, Inland Center, and Carousel Mall enter into a
three-party, binding, 10-year agreement that would not allow the
relocation of any existing major department store from one mall to
another.
RECESS MEETING
At 4:41 p.m., Mayor Minor declared a five-minute recess.
20
4/1/1996
RECONVENE MEETING
At 4:53 p.m., Mayor Minor reconvened the regular meeting of
the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino in the
Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San
Bernardino, California.
ROLL CALL
Roll call was taken by City Clerk Rachel Clark with the
following being present: Mayor Minor; Council Members Negrete,
Curlin, Arias, Oberhelman, Devlin, Anderson, Miller; Deputy City
Attorney Empeno, City Clerk Rachel Clark, Director of Planning and
Building Services Boughey, Associate Planner Finn. Absent: None.
PUBLIC HEARING - DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 91-01 -
EXISTING INLAND CENTER MALL - ADJACENT TO INLAND
DRIVE & DIRECTLY NORTHEAST OF I'215 - GENERAL
MANAGEMENT, INC.
EXPAND
CENTER
GROWTH
(29)
Marlene Fox, Law Offices of Marlene A. Fox, A Professional
Corporation, 2031 Orchard Drive, Newport Beach, CA, representing
the Central City Company and Carousel Mall, stated that since the
conception of the Inland Center Mall expansion plan (1992) the
Carousel Mall has not registered any opposition. However, they do
have a number of concerns, including the issue of liquefaction,
which is an environmental issue and has been held as such by the
courts.
Yoshi Moriwaki, Ph. D., P. E., Pri.ncipal, National Practice
Manager, Seismic Hazards and Earthquake Engineering, Woodward-Clyde
Consultants, 2020 E. First Street, Sui~e 400, Santa Ana, CA, made
an overhead presentation relative to liquefaction and spoke on the
seismic vulnerability of the area surrounding Inland Center Mall.
Dr. Moriwaki stated that three conditions must exist for high
liquefaction potential: 1) high earthquake shaking, 2) high
groundwater table, and 3) sufficiently loose sandy soils, all of
which exist in this area. In response to Council inquiry, Dr.
Moriwaki acknowledged that the liquefaction problem could be
mitigated by a very large amount of concrete foundation. Dr.
Moriwaki stated that the ErR exhibits significant deficiencies with
respect to liquefaction.
Deputy City Attorney Empeno stated that it was important for
Council to consider Dr. Moriwaki's comments, as well as all the
other comments of the experts that may be provided by the Carousel
Mall, because State law requires recirculation of a final EIR if
significant new information is provided. He stated that
significant new information is specifically defined in state law
under Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations as information
that shows that a project will have new or more severe significant
effects on the environment, not disclosed in the Environmental
21
4/1/1996
Impact Report. He noted that the key language is "not disclosed in
the Environmental Impact Report." However, the liquefaction matter
had been addressed in the existing EIR.
John Barneich, P.E., Senior Principal, Woodward-Clyde
Consultants, 2020 E. First Street, Suite 400, Santa Ana, CA,
presented a model with buildings on two soil types and noted what
happens to the buildings when the soil begins to vibrate. He noted
that there is no disagreement between the two factions that
liquefaction would occur at the site ir. the event of a significant
earthquake; however, the disagreement concerns the extent and
consequences of the liquefaction.
Mr. Barneich continued by stating that he did not believe this
was a design issue due to the probable extent and consequences of
the liquefaction, and the potential litigation therefrom, which
could be a fatal flaw to this development. He provided the basis
for believing that the liquefaction mitigation measures noted
within the EIR were not adequate, stating that the extent of the
mitigation required would be so great as to be nonviable with
respect to the proposed development and, therefore, would be a
fatal flaw.
Len Knapp, Knapp Architectural Er.gineers, 2105 N. Arrowhead
Avenue, San Bernardino, CA, structural consultants of record on the
Superblock six-level parking structure, spoke relative to the
bridges around the perimeter of the site along the flood control
channel. He presented an overlay display of the existing and new
facilities proposed for Inland Center Mall, stating that in essence
this represents an island. He then pointed out the existing
concrete bridge structures which represent the sole means of egress
onto that island, stating that these five existing concrete bridge
structures are well over 30 years old and not designed with the
consideration of liquefaction or current seismic requirements in
mind. If a major earthquake were to occur on this site, emergency
response equipment would definitely be needed, and without these
bridges that would be impossible.
Mr. Knapp expressed concern regarding the second story
addition stating that measures could be taken and conditions could
be addressed and mitigated as far as dealing with liquefaction and
the high seismicity of the site; however, it is critical not to
glaze over these issues when considering the structural design, as
no structure is any stronger than its foundation. Mr. Knapp
questioned whether the estimated cost of $65 million was based on
the special considerations of seismicity which might be encountered
and the liquefaction potential. He stressed that the important
issue is life safety.
Attorney Marlene Fox stated that this is not a difference of
opinion among experts; this is a question of information that is
not available and has not been made available.
22
4/1/1996
Steve Sasaki, Senior Engineer, WPA Traffic Engineering, Inc.,
23421 South pointe Drive, Ste. 190, Laguna Hills, CA, gave an
overhead slide presentation, stating that the development agreement
appears to be inconsistent with the traffic studies. This causes
one to believe that the City will make up the difference in the
costs of the traffic impacts, either through money or through
unacceptable traffic conditions.
Mr. Sasaki ascertained that the real traffic impacts are
unknown, but inconsistency exists between several of the documents
and the laws that need to be followed regarding traffic. Basically,
one of the major findings by the applicant's own analysis indicates
there is inconsistency with the City's General Plan. Mr. Sasaki
addressed the issue of signal cycle lengths, and how study results
could be significantly changed by the signal cycle lengths, and
stated that what was analyzed in the EIR does not match the
improvements that would be required. He also noted that the
mitigations shown in the EIR do not match up to what is required in
the development agreement, and stated that the City could be
responsible for greater expenses than what is noted within the
project mitigation cost estimates in the ErR.
Mayor Minor confirmed that rights-of-way had not been
purchased, design plans had not been drawn, and at this time, no
money had been appropriated for the widening of I-215.
Hans Giroux, Senior Scientist, Giroux & Associates, 17744 Sky
Park Circle, Suite 210, Irvine, CA, discussed air quality and noise
impacts. He stated they have one residual issue relative to air
quality, and that is what happens on a peak shopping day when
traffic backs up onto the freeway and onto surface streets. He
stated this had not been analyzed.
Dr. Alfred Gobar, Alfred Gobar Associates, 721 Kimberly
Avenue, Placentia, CA, spoke regarding socioeconomic issues. He
stated that it is difficult to talk about precise answers regarding
negative impacts, but it is possible to talk about significant
impacts. He noted that if, as one report had said, the Ontario
Mills project had the potential to impact Inland Center by up to 30
percent, and it is 20 miles away, what would be the impact on a
center by the opening of a larger center just a few miles away.
RECESS MEETING
At 6:43 p.m., Mayor Minor declared a five-minute recess.
RECONVENE MEETING
At 6:55 p.m., Mayor Minor reconvened the regular meeting of
the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino in the
Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San
Bernardino, California.
23
4/1/1996
ROLL CALL
Roll call was taken by City Clerk Rachel Clark with the
following being present: Mayor Minor; Council Members Negrete,
Curlin, Arias, Oberhelman, Devlin, Anderson, Miller; Deputy City
Attorney Empeno, City Clerk Rachel Clark, Director of Planning and
Building Services Boughey, Associate Planner Finn. Absent: None.
PUBLIC HEARING - DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 91-01 -
EXISTING INLAND CENTER MALL - ADJACENT TO INLAND
DRIVE & DIRECTLY NORTHEAST OF I -215 - GENERAL
MANAGEMENT, INC.
EXPAND
CENTER
GROWTH
(29)
Attorney Marlene Fox stated that the point they were trying to
make thus far is that significant information is missing from the
EIR. However, one other CEQA issue she wanted to raise involved
the fact that the Carousel Mall is located in a redevelopment area,
thus findings had to be made that the area was blighted, there was
a compelling economic need, and the project had to be found to be
urbanized.
Ms. Fox noted that in 1994, Timothy Steinhaus, Economic
Development Agency (EDA) Administrator, had pointed out that the
Inland Center Mall area is within the Inland Valley Development
Agency (IVDA) and their tax increment dollars would not come to the
EDA for the City of San Bernardino, but would instead go to the
IVDA. She stated she had received a copy of a letter dated March
29, 1996, written by Mr. Steinhaus stating that the Mayor was
pursuing the transfer of the Inland Center Mall from IVDA to the
City (EDA). She noted that this would come under the heading of a
project when you deal with CEQA, and if that's to be part of this
project, it was never discussed and is not a part of the EIR. She
added that one of the things that case law tells you quite
emphatically is that you cannot piecemeal a project. You must
address the whole of the actions, so if there is something to be
done about transferring the Inland Center Mall from IVDA, this must
be addressed in the EIR.
Attorney Fox continued by commenting on the PPS Project for
Public Spaces, Inc., "San Bernardino Downtown Framework Plan"
originally prepared in June 1992 and updated in March 1995. She
noted that said report states that the City of San Bernardino is
the predominant owner of vacant land in the downtown area, and that
certain things are very critical to the downtown area to make it a
viable and attractive area, inviting to workers and community
members alike. She stated that in order to bring more business and
life to the downtown area, the report indicates a need to identify
and recruit anchor attractions, such as a multi-cinema complex and
maj or restaurants to accomplish this goal; and discusses the
Carousel Mall and the improvements of the Carousel Mall as being an
integral part of this downtown plan, along with the movie theater.
She wondered, therefore, why the proponents of the Inland Center
Mall expansion project would think it strange for Carousel Mall and
24
4/1/1996
Central City Company to be concerned about a multi-cinema complex
being situated in the Inland Center Mall, when it becomes
immediately apparent that when you do this you will take that
opportunity away from the downtown area.
Ms. Fox introduced a letter dated March 29, 1996, from Fred
Kent, President of PPS, Project for Public Spaces, Inc., which
stressed the importance of a theater complex in the downtown area.
She stated that when you look at the PPS plan and the City's
General Plan, you must remember that the City passed a resolution
of the Mayor and Common Council, Resolution No. 93-336, placing the
highest priority on the development of downtown San Bernardino.
Ms. Fox submitted letters dated March 29, March 30, and April
1, 1996, from the following Central City Mall businesses denoting
their concerns relative to the cO:ltinued success of their
operations if the downtown area is not developed as planned: Cal
Subs; CCMS, Inc., Carousel Mall Merchants Association; CCM/Julius;
Central City Company, Salvatore F. Catalano, CSM, General Manager;
Central City Company, Robert Curci, Managing Partner; Central City
Company, Tony Valencia, Assistant Manager, Carousel Mall; Frame 'N
Lens; Fredric H. Rubel; Grand Jewelers; Heartland USA; Luke and
Vondey; Montgomery Ward; Our Town; J.C. Penney; San Bernardino
Downtown Business Association, Inc.; Tekin Brothers; the Gang & I;
and The Loving Cup.
Ms. Fox submitted and read a letter dated April 1, 1996, from
Curci-Turner Company, P.O. Box 1549 Newport Beach, CA, dispelling
the rumor that J. C. Penney was being persuaded to move to the
proposed Redlands Mall. The letter proposed an agreement which
would contain both 1) the commitment by Mano Management, Inc.
(Mano) to refrain from relocating anchor tenants from Carousel Mall
to the Inland Center Mall, and 2) the commitment by John Curci and
Robert Curci to take all actions within their legal power to retain
anchor tenants, including J.C. Penney, at the Carousel Mall.
Ms. Fox summed up by stating that they were concerned about
the environment, redevelopment agency conflicts, new projects that
were never contemplated in the development agreement, and
illegalities with regard to the development agreement. She voiced
particular concern regarding an applicant who comes before a public
body stating that it is vital and urgent to act on this today,
because if they don't position themselves they will lose this, yet
states on the other hand that eight or ten years down the road they
don't want to be responsible for off-site impacts, but the City is
not to worry as they will indemnify the City for the litigation.
John Mirau, Attorney with Mirau, Edwards, Cannon & Harter
Professional Corporation, 599 N. HE" Street, Suite 205, San
Bernardino, CA, spoke regarding the legality of the so-called
Standstill Agreement, where one mall would not pirate the tenants
of the other mall. He stated they are as concerned about the
25
4/1/1996
enforceability of this type of agreement as Mano would be, as it
would not be a solution if it is not enforceable; therefore, they
had hired Attorney Paul pensig of Mudge, Rose & Guthrie, Los
Angeles, CA, who is an expert in anti-trust matters. Mr. pensig
reviewed the development agreement and the issues involved to
determine whether there was a way to structure a Standstill
Agreement, and he had indicated there was definitely a way to
structure such an agreement in a legal fashion. Thus, the offer to
establish an agreement with the City and Inland Center Mall.
Mr. Mirau stated that a second issue he wanted to address was
the win-win scenario. He noted that it was very much a good faith
effort to try and come up with a solution that deals with the
City's concerns, Carousel Mall's concerns, and the concerns of
Inland Center; and they thought this was a way to proceed forward
while protecting everyone's interests. He stated that they had
come to the table with a solution and basically heard the other
side coming to the table with threats--threats that Gottschalks,
Macy's, and the theater will close down and leave if the City does
not do it their way.
Deputy City Attorney Empeno stated he wanted to comment on a
legal issue where his name came up regarding the legality of a
Standstill Agreement. He stated he was contacted by Attorney Paul
pensig of Mudge Rose & Guthrie regarding the validity of certain
proposed conditions to the agreement, basically prohibiting the
anchor tenants of Carousel Mall from transferring to Inland Center
Mall. He noted that Mr. pensig was ignorant of any exemptions for
public entities, and that exemption is based on very complex issues
regarding anti-trust matters. He stated that he is not an expert
on these matters and wanted to be on record that neither he nor
anyone in the City Attorney's Office believes that the anti-trust
issue has been resolved.
Sam Catalano, General Manager, Carousel Mall, 295 Carousel
Mall, San Bernardino, CA, stated he has been downtown since 1963,
and most of this time has been spent working with City government
to improve the downtown area. He noted that within the context of
the PPS plan there is a vision for downtown that has been supported
by this mayor and the council, who have been extremely helpful in
attempting to set the building blocks in place for this vision to
come to fruition. He stated that the proponents have maintained
that we ought to let the market forces prevail--that market forces
dictate these things--but he does not believe this. Mr. Catalano
stated he believes the general plan controls market forces, and
that the people of the community, through the enacting of the
general plan, through the many public hearings that have been held,
and through the development enactment 0: the downtown plan (updated
in June 1995) have stated their vision for this community. He
stated that the mechanisms are in place to help implement this
plan, and the Mayor and Council have t,"e power to control it.
26
4/1/1996
Mr. Catalano noted that the proposed development agreement
severely limits the City to consideration of very limited final
design issues regarding the theater project, or a number of other
things which would require conditional use permits. He pointed out
that Inland Center is not obligated nor does it commit to do
anything in this development agreement; that the agreement is
permissive and discretionary, and the City would be allowing them
to do the development. He added that the win-win agreement
proposed by Carousel Mall was made light of, and yet they were
willing to commit to the City an expenditure of $3 million
immediately in Phase I of their development plan. He stated that
the transfer of Inland Center Mall from the IVDA project area to
possibly a City redevelopment project area concerns him not so much
as a member of the Carousel Mall team, but the bigger picture of
what he has spent most of his entire life working on, and that is
trying to improve the City of San Bernardino. He concluded by
pointing out that the developer (Mano) has specifically excluded
himself from participating in what could be major costs relative to
off-site improvements.
Mayor Minor submitted letters from the following in support of
the Inland Center Mall expansion proj ect: Fourth Street Rock
Crusher, dated March 26, 1996; Gottschalks, undated; East Inland
Empire Association of Realtors, dated March 29, 1996; and Jerry
Atkinson of Center Chevrolet, undated.
Mayor Minor submitted letters from the following in opposition
to the Inland Center Mall expansion proj ect: PPS, proj ect for
Public Services, Inc., dated March 29, 1996, and John Lightburn, a
governmental relations consultant, undated.
DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY EMPENO EXCUSED
At 8:26 p.m., Deputy City Attorney Empeno left the Council
meeting and was replaced by City Attorney Penman.
The following individuals spoke in support of the proposed
Inland Center expansion project:
Graciano Gomez, 1295 E. Shamrock, San Bernardino, CA.
Bill Tiger, 3667 Broadmoor Boulevard, San Bernardino, CA.
Bill Caldwell, 3077 San Gabriel Stcreet, San Bernardino, CA.
David Schulze, East Inland Empire Association of Realtors,
1798 N. "D" Street, San Bernardino, CA,
Ernie Tyler, 202 Inland Center Drive, San Bernardino, CA.
Sam Watson, owner of Chuck E. Cheese, P.O. Box 3647, Costa
Mesa, CA.
Robert Neves, 2348 Sterling, #439, San Bernardino, CA.
Marvin Reiter, 330 N. "D" Street, San Bernardino, CA.
Maurice Calderon, 1501 Ridge Street, Redlands, CA, vice-
President Inland Empire Hispanic Chamber of Commerce.
27
4/1/1996
The following individuals spoke in opposition to the proposed
Inland Center expansion project:
Robin Miller, 235 Carousel Mall, San Bernardino, CA.
Robert Mortimer, a geologist speaking as a private citizen,
17983 Rancho Avenue, San Bernardino, CA.
Tony Valencia, 295 Carousel Mall, San Bernardino,
Wallace Green, 295 Carousel Mall, San Bernardino,
letter into the record from Jerry Kane, Manager, J.
dated April 1, 1996.
CA.
CA, read a
C. Penney,
The following individuals submitted a speaker request form,
indicating support of the Inland Center expansion project:
Jerry Atkinson, P.O. Box 5128, San Bernardino, CA.
Jordan Grinker, 255 N. "D" Street, San Bernardino, CA.
Richard Hernandez, 234 E. Drake Drive, San Bernardino, CA.
Patrick Milligan, 323 W. Court Street, San Bernardino, CA.
The following individuals submitted a speaker request form,
indicating opposition to the Inland Center expansion project:
Bob Curci, 295 Carousel Mall, San Bernardino, CA.
Leonard Knapp, 2105 N. Arrowhead Avenue, San Bernardino, CA.
The
solution,
following individuals spoke in support
encouraging expansion of both malls:
of
a
win-win
Jim Sivelle, 5350 Park Avenue, San Bernardino, CA.
Ann Atkinson, 1355 S. "E" Street, San Bernardino, CA,
representing the San Bernardino area Chamber of Commerce.
Carl Dameron, 330 N. "D" Street, San Bernardino, CA.
Richard Rieker, P.O. Box 5340, San Bernardino, CA, who
presented a letter dated March 29, 1996, on behalf of the Downtown
Business Association.
Dave DeLille, Marketing Director, Carousel Mall, read a letter
dated March 29, 1996, from Elsa Carlton, president, Carousel Mall
Merchants Association.
Bill Leonard, 1711 Lomas Privados Drive, San Bernardino, CA.
Council Member Curlin made a
Member Anderson, and unanimously
closed.
motion,
carried,
seconded
that the
by Council
hearing be
RECESS MEETING
At 8:50 p.m., Mayor Minor declared a five-minute recess.
28
4/1/1996
RECONVENE MEETING
At 9:00 p.m., Mayor Minor reconvened the regular meeting of
the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino in the
Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San
Bernardino, California.
ROLL CALL
Roll call was taken by City Clerk Rachel Clark with the
following being present: Mayor Minor; Council Members Negrete,
Curlin, Arias, Oberhelman, Devlin, Anderson, Miller; City Attorney
Penman, City Clerk Rachel Clark, Director of Planning and Building
Services Boughey, Associate Planner Finn. Absent: None.
PUBLIC HEARING - DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 91-01 -
EXISTING INLAND CENTER MALL - ADJACENT TO INLAND
DRIVE & DIRECTLY NORTHEAST OF 1-215 - GENERAL
MANAGEMENT, INC.
EXPAND
CENTER
GROWTH
(29)
Senior Assistant City Attorney Carlyle, speaking from the
podium, gave a recap of the hearing as follows:
Hearing started at 2:10 p.m., and for 50 minutes staff made
their presentation, followed by an approximate 15-minute break.
Then, the developer presented its side for approximately 1 hour, 20
minutes, with questions and answers during that period, but there
was no break. After an approximate 25-minute break, the Carousel
Mall representatives spoke from approximately 5:00 to 7:40 p.m.
There was one break of approximately 15 minutes, and again, there
were questions and answers. After an approximate 15 minute break,
at 7:55 p.m., for the next 55 minutes there were public comments
with everything being concluded and the public hearing closed at
8:50 p.m. this evening.
Mike Finn, Associate Planner, stated that staff would address
various important points in order to clarify the fact that staff
believes the information before the Council is sufficient and no
new issues were brought forth during the hearing that have not been
previously raised and responded to.
Tom Dodson, City Environmental Consultant, responded to some
of the air quality and geotechnical issues. He stated that the
carbon monoxide hotspot evaluations were based upon level service
F on I-215, which means all the traffic is stopped. The air
quality data clearly indicates that they evaluated the maximum
impact situation, and there were no violations of carbon monoxide
hotspots. He stated that there is no question that there is high
liquefaction potential at this location and that there is a high
seismic hazard from ground shaking at this location; however,
things have been portrayed much worse than they really are by the
opponents of this project.
29
4/1/1996
Barry Meyer, Principal Engineer, Law/Crandall Office, Los
Angeles, CA, applicant's expert witness, affirmed that gravel had
been considered in their analyses, and they did consider very high
ground motions and the presence of high groundwater at the site.
He added that the examples of liquefaction presented by the
opponents were not appropriate in terms of the conditions present
at the site, and the applicant and staff believe that all issues
that have been brought forward are solvable.
Tom Dodson stated that when a second story is considered for
the Inland Center Mall, the rest of the structures would have to be
retrofitted and its strength increased to meet current seismic
requirements.
CITY ATTORNEY
At 9: 09 p. m. ,
replaced by Deputy
PENMAN EXCUSED
City Attorney Penman
City Attorney Empeno.
left the meeting and was
Mike Grubbs, Public Works Department, made concluding remarks
relative to liquefaction, stating that the characterization of the
site as being an island is incorrect. He stated that there is
sufficient access to the site, and no existing evidence that the
bridges providing this access are inadequate.
Anwar Wagdy,
that the traffic
rechecked.
Traffic Engineer, Public Works Department, noted
study was carefully developed and thoroughly
City Attorney Penman, speaking from the podium, announced that
due to the fact that one of the applicant's expert witnesses had
been allowed to speak a second time, the same consideration must be
extended to the opposition.
John Barneich, Woodward-Clyde Consultants, stated they could
not see where the gravel had been taken into account in the study;
and this remains the issue.
Mayor Minor inquired of Deputy City Attorney Empeno whether
the EIR was legally adequate.
Deputy City Attorney Empeno stated that state law provides
that an EIR should be prepared with a sufficient degree of analysis
to provide decision makers with information which enables them to
make a decision which intelligently takes account of environmental
consequences. An evaluation of the environmental effects of a
proposed proj ect need not be exhaust:'. ve and disagreement among
experts does not make an EIR inadequate; however, the EIR should
summarize the main points of disagreement among the experts.
Attorney Empeno stated that the courts do not look for
perfection but for adequacy, completeness, and a good faith effort
at full disclosure. Based on the documents and testimony provided,
30
4/1/1996
the City felt that no new significant information, as defined in
CEQA (meaning information regarding significant adverse
environmental effects not discussed in the EIR, which would require
recirculation of the EIR) , had been submitted to the City. He
stated that staff felt the final EIR report, consisting of the
draft EIR, the comments, and the response to comments, was legally
adequate; and that the Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program and
the facts finding the Statements of Overriding Consideration are
legally adequate; therefore, certification of the ErR is legally
defensible. He stated that staff believes the development complies
with state law, as well as City ordinances, and adequately protects
the City.
Mayor Minor expressed discomfort and concern with the fact
that this decision had created a certain divisiveness within the
city; and noted that there was a lot of acrimony, distrust, and
anger between people who had been friends for years. He continued
that he wanted everyone to know that he and the Council would
continue to work with either and/or both malls to make sure that
they are both advanced into a position of being economical, viable
operations.
Secondly, he stated that he had tried to get the malls
together over the last few days, but this had not worked out.
However, he had spoken with Mr. Ostoich and asked him if he would
concede to the following: 1) Lower the development agreement from
30 to 25 years, and 2) Put some type of moratorium on proceeding
with the theater at Inland Center Mall. He believed Mr. Ostoich
had agreed to a two-year moratorium on the theater if certain
milestones were met during the two years.
Mr. Ostoich inquired about the milestones, and Mayor Minor
began by delineating the borders of the general downtown area as
bounded by Mill Street on the south, 8th Street on the north, I-215
on the west, and Arrowhead Avenue on the east. He continued with
the milestones, stating that within nine months of the approval
date of this development agreement, the EDA shall have entered into
a binding agreement with a party providing for the development of
a multi-screen cinema complex within the downtown area, and within
24 months from the approval date of this development agreement, the
party to the agreement with the EDA shall have entered into a valid
and binding lease or operating agreement with a theater operator
for the multi-screen cinema complex within the downtown area.
Mr. Ostoich stated he understood that in effect the applicant
would be agreeing to stand still on any expansion of their theater
for a period of two years, in the sense that they would agree not
to file even an application for the conditional use permit until
the expiration of that time. He stated they would agree to this
concession and they would agree to reduce the term of the
development to 25 years if all other things could be approved as
brought forth before the Council.
31
4/1/1996
RES. 96-84 - RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT;
ADOPTING THE STATEMENTS OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION AND
THE MITIGATION MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM AND ADOPTING
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 91-01 TO GOVERN THE EXPANSION
OF THE INLAND CENTER MALL. (29)
RES. 96-85 - RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
CERTIFYING THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT FOR THE
INLAND CENTER MALL EXPANSION PROJECT PURSUANT TO THE
CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PLAN. (29)
Council Member Negrete made a motion, seconded by Council
Member Arias, to certify the Environmental Impact Report and the
findings pursuant to CEQA and to approve Development Agreement No.
91-01 with the following amendments: A 20-year development
agreement instead of 30, that the Carousel Mall move forward now or
immediately with their expansion plan and their investment, with a
two-year agreement window for the negotiation of the downtown
cinema which is part of the general plan or the PPS plan; both
malls to move forward to develop new anchors for both, which would
bring new sales tax and revenue; and all legal matters be handled
by the City Attorney's Office and staff to evaluate the best
agreements, the Tri-Agreement, the Traffic Impact Analysis and the
cost. (Note: There was no vote taken.)
Council Member Arias urged Inland Center Mall to use local
vendors and local labor as they move forward with their development
plans. She stated she would like to see the Inland Center Mall
more involved in the San Bernardino community. She also urged
Carousel Mall to immediately prepare their application for
additional development, stating that the City should not turn its
back on Mr. Curci and Mr. Catalano, who have been very visible and
active participants in the community. Council Member Arias also
complimented Carousel Mallon the diversity of their management
staff.
Deputy City Attorney Empeno asked that Council Member Negrete
repeat his motion, and Council Member Negrete stated the following:
To certify the Environmental Impact Report and the findings
pursuant to CEQA and to approve Development Agreement No. 91-01
with the following amendments: 1) A 20-year development agreement
instead of 30-year be considered; 2) A two-year window be allowed
for the downtown cinema and procedures for all the legalities for
that to be located downtown to move forward; 3) That the Carousel
Mall move forward now with their extended program and their
investment; 4) Both malls to move forward to develop new anchors
for both which will bring to the area new sales tax and revenues;
and 5) The last is that all legal matters involving the Traffic
Impact Analysis and the Tri-Agreement be discussed and be handled
with our City Attorney's Office.
32
4/1/1996
Deputy City Attorney Empeno clarified that there were two
resolutions before the Council which encompass documentation
relative to the EIR, and he asked that the motion include adoption
of both of those resolutions.
Council Member Negrete stated that those resolutions were
included in the beginning of his motion, which referenced the EIR,
and at the end of his motion, which referenced the traffic (TIA).
Deputy City Attorney Empeno stated he believed there was still
some ambiguity regarding the fourth condition regarding both malls
developing new anchors, and asked Council Member Negrete to clarify
the intent behind that statement.
Council Member Negrete stated the intent was (pursuant to the
reports he had read) that there would be new sales tax, not
relocation of sales tax. The reports clearly stated that there
would be three anchors- -two anchors starting in Phase I of the
Inland Center Mall and a third anchor during Phase II at the end of
the 12 years. In everything he had read it indicated that new
sales tax would be created in the area, which means new anchors.
Deputy City Attorney Empeno inquired whether Council Member
Negrete's intent by the fourth condition was to prohibit any of the
currently existing anchor tenants at the Carousel Mall from
transferring to the expanded area of the Inland Center Mall.
Council Member Negrete stated it would not be his intent to
prohibit them, but it would be his intent to encourage them to stay
and remain where they are with the new expansion.
Mayor Minor clarified the motion as follows:
That the resolution be adopted which certifies the
Environmental Impact Report, adopts the Statements of Overriding
Consideration based on the appropriate findings pursuant to CEQA,
adopts the Mitigation Monitoring program and approves Development
Agreement No. 91-01.
He expressed concern that the part relative to encouraging the
malls to seek outside sources for their new anchors might not be
appropriate as part of the motion, although it was his
understanding that the Inland Center Mall had two new anchors lined
up.
City Clerk Rachel Clark read the motion back to Council Member
Negrete, as follows: That the resolution be adopted which
certifies the Environmental Impact Repo,-t, adopts the Statements of
Overriding Consideration based on the appropriate findings pursuant
to CEQA, adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program, and approves
Development Agreement No. 91-01, and encourages the outside
anchors.
33
4/1/1996
Council Member Negrete stated he wanted the wording to be,
"encourage new business. II
It was noted that the motion would include, that said
resolution be adopted which certifies the Traffic Impact Analysis,
and that the Legal Office look into the possible benefits, if it is
appropriate, of a Tri-Agreement (the win-win scenario) .
Al Boughey asked for a second clarification on the motion, and
the Mayor stated it was the form motion with the addition, "to
encourage outside business."
Council Member Curlin expressed concern over the differences
of opinion between the experts, noting that some of the speakers
had indicated that Inland Center Mall is currently at risk in terms
of liquefaction and seismic activity. It also concerned him that
statements had been made that many of the investigations made by
the representatives of Carousel Mall were outside the scope of the
studies that were made by the City and proponents of the project.
Staff reiterated that existing structures would require
retrofitting to meet seismic and liquefaction standards, and noted
that if the developer is unwilling to meet the mitigation required
by the liquefaction ordinance, they would not be allowed to build.
They also stressed that the existing buildings were built under the
appropriate codes at the time and are no less safe than any other
building. Staff also reaffirmed their belief that the scope of the
City's investigation was totally adequate.
Discussion continued, and Council Member Oberhelman noted that
there was a large quantity of information provided; however, he
expressed concern relative to the quality of the information,
particularly in the areas of economics and traffic and how they
were addressed in the draft EIR. He also expressed concern
relative to the language and nature of the development agreement.
He noted that Council had recently experienced what could happen
when dealing with a developer where the terms of the agreement are
not specific enough and how it can be costly to the City down the
line. He ascertained that the proposed development agreement was
not specific enough as to what the developer's responsibilities
were, and if the intent of the developer was to be in a competitive
position and to protect their position against external forces such
as Redlands, then there was no justification for a 30-year, 25-
year, or even a 20-year development agreement. If their intention
was as thus stated, then there should be some specific performance
points in the development agreement requiring the developer to do
certain things within certain time frames. The agreement should be
very specific regarding public improvements and what the cost
sharing would be. It should outline what the improvements are,
including impacts created by traffic that will require certain
kinds of signalization or street improvements, lighting
improvements, etc.
34
4/1/1996
Council Member Oberhelman stated he could not support the
development agreement before him, as he did not think it was in the
best interests of the City in terms of the length of the agreement,
the absence of performance requirements on the part of the
developer, and the vagueness relative to what the developer's
financial responsibility would be for public improvements. He
stated he was less than enthusiastic about certifying the EIR,
because there was a volume of information but a dearth in terms of
quality of information; particularly in terms of traffic and its
economic impact.
Council Member Oberhelman recommended disapproval of the
development agreement as presented, a:ld suggested that the City
aggressively negotiate some specific performance points for the
developer and some specific language o~ costs, with the length of
the agreement substantially less than 20 years, so that the
developer's stated intent of moving forward as quickly as possible
would have to be accomplished; otherwise they would not have the
entitlement to use the agreement for an extended period of time to
merely enhance the value of their property without actually
performing or doing anything that would produce any benefits for
the City.
Deputy City Attorney Empeno acknowledged that the City
Attorney's Office had signed off on the development agreement as
being legally useable and acceptable.
At this time, Deputy City Attorney Empeno asked about Council
Member Negrete's amendment to the motion, and wanted to clarify the
legal aspects of the resolution which certifies the Traffic Impact
Analysis.
City Clerk Rachel Clark pointed out that when Mayor Minor
restated Council Member Negrete's original motion, the amendments
which provided for a 20-year development agreement instead of a 30-
year agreement, and for a two-year window to allow for a downtown
cinema to move forward, were not included.
Mayor Minor agreed these amendments should be included in the
motion.
Council Member Devlin agreed that 30 years was far too long
a time frame for the agreement and agreed with the concept of the
theater being developed downtown. He stated he would like to see
both malls move forward and the City support both efforts. He
inquired of Deputy City Attorney Empeno whether the agreement was
adequate in terms of protecting the City.
Deputy City Attorney Empeno pointed out two paragraphs on page
16 of the development agreement which contained language he called,
"a saving clause for the City," which would adequately protect the
City.
35
4/1/1996
Council Member Anderson expressed pride in the way the
discussions had transpired and supported giving the Inland Center
Mall the go-ahead to expand, while also granting the downtown the
exclusive rights for the next two years to have the theaters. She
stated she had shared her feelings with personnel of both malls
regarding the need for the malls to give back to the community,
forming a partnership between the malls and the citizens of the
city.
Council Member Miller inquired whether it was nailed down as
to who will pay what in terms of signaling and traffic issues and
expressed approval and enthusiasm for the upgrade of Carousel Mall
and a downtown theater complex.
Staff indicated that paragraph E. of the resolution approving
the Traff ic Impact Analysis report states that the fair share
contribution of Inland Center Mall's expansion project is estimated
to be $1,531,017 for Congestion Management Plan (CMP) roadway and
freeway improvements, which includes all of the traffic impact
mitigation measures dealing with roadway and freeway improvements.
Council Member Oberhelman inquired whether a substitute motion
with terms of the development agreement to be for 15 years and
specific performance points for both Pr.ase I and Phase II would be
appropriate. He stated he wanted language which would assure that
the developer would aggressively and seriously pursue their stated
plans, to include dropdead language with time frames that
correspond to the sense of urgency that has been created by their
statements that if they don't do this right now, Redlands is going
lIto do it to US.'I
Council Member Oberhelman made a substitute motion, seconded
by Council Member Arias, that approves a total 15-year development
agreement; and put in there for phase I some very short time frames
for them to submit specific plans and specifications for approval,
something in the area of three years for Phase I, seven years for
Phase II; specifically identify the public improvements that the
developer will pay for in the development agreement; and also put
a provision in there that the theater will not be in Phase I, and
they can't commence Phase II until they've submitted plans-- or you
can say until three years has elapsed--but somehow put in language
that they will not submit plans for, or an application for a
conditional use permit for a multiplex theater within three years.
Mayor Minor stated that he believed the Inland Center Mall
would go for a 20-year agreement, but was uncertain if they would
accept a lesser time frame. He did not believe a deal could be
reached with Inland Center Mall with the stipulations outlined in
Council Member Oberhelman's motion.
36
4/1/1996
Council Member Miller noted that when you are dealing with a
large package such as this, it is not unusual for it to take three
or four years just to line up financing.
City Clerk Rachel Clark repeated the motion, as follows:
Substitute motion by Council Member Oberhelman, seconded by Council
Member Arias, to change the term of the development agreement from
30 years to 15 years; to include in Pl:ase I some very short time
frames which require the developer to submit specific plans and
specifications for approval, for example, three years for Phase I,
seven years for Phase I I; include in the development agreement
identification of specific public improvements that the developer
will pay for; and also include a provision for the theater in one
of two ways: A) That the theater will not be included in Phase I,
or B) until three years have elapsed; and include language that
they will not submit plans or applicat~on for the conditional use
permit for the multiplex theater within three years.
Mayor Minor pointed out that in the substitute motion, Council
Member Oberhelman'S intent was to accept the certification of the
Environmental Impact Report; that he was dealing with the
development agreement component in the motion and the acceptance of
the certification should be in the same motion.
City Clerk Rachel Clark inquired whether the motion included
the resolutions. Council Member Oberhelman stated it did.
The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes:
Members Negrete, Curlin, Arias, Oberhelman, Devlin,
Nays: Council Member Miller. Absent: None.
Council
Anderson.
Mark Ostoich stated that they would not sign the development
agreement as authorized by the approved motion. He noted that he
had previously agreed to lower the term to 25 years; however, they
would agree to lower it to 20 years to obtain approval; and they
would agree to the two-year standstill on the theater as proposed
by Mayor Minor, but they were not going to renegotiate the
development agreement beyond that. He stated that the motion as
passed was tantamount to a denial.
Discussion ensued regarding whether the Council Members wanted
to rethink their position and reconsider the matter.
Council Member Devlin made a motion, seconded by Council
Member Anderson, that the previous action to change the term of the
development agreement from 30 years to 15 years; to include in
Phase I some very short time frames which require the developer to
submit specific plans and specifications for approval, for example,
three years for Phase I, seven years for Phase II; include in the
development agreement identification of specific public
improvements that the developer will pay for; and also include a
provision for the theater in one of two ways: A) That the theater
37
4/1/1996
will not be included in Phase I, or B) until three years have
elapsed; and include language that they will not submit plans or
application for the conditional use permit for the multiplex
theater within three years, be reconsidered.
The motion carried by the
Members Negrete, Curlin, Arias,
Council Member Oberhelman.
following vote:
Devlin, Anderson,
Ayes: Council
Miller. Nays:
Council Member Negrete made a motion (as read into the record
by City Clerk Rachel Clark), seconded by Council Member Miller,
that resolution be adopted which certifies the Environmental Impact
Report, adopts the Statements of Overriding Consideration based on
the appropriate findings pursuant to CEQA, adopts the Mitigation
Monitoring Program, and approves Development Agreement No. 91-01.
That the Development Agreement be for a period of twenty (20) years
and that a two-year window be allowed for a downtown cinema complex
to go forward, and further that the Mayor and Common Council
encourages new business.
The motion carried, and Resolution No. 96-84 was adopted by
the following vote: Ayes: Council Members Negrete, Arias, Devlin,
Anderson, Miller. Nays: Council Members Curlin, Oberhelman.
Absent: None.
Council Member Devlin made a motion, seconded by Council
Member Anderson, that said resolution be adopted which certifies
the Traffic Impact Analysis.
The motion carried, and Resolution No. 96-85
the following vote: Ayes: Council Members Negrete,
Oberhelman, Devlin, Anderson, Miller. Nays: None.
was adopted by
Curlin, Arias,
Absent: None.
DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES BOUGHEY &
ASSOCIATE PLANNER FINN EXCUSED
At 10: 28 p. m., Director of Planning and Building Services
Boughey and Associate Planner Finn left the Council meeting and
were replaced by City Administrator Shauna Clark.
DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY EMPENO EXCUSED
At 10:28 p.m., Deputy City Attorney Empeno left the Council
meeting and was replaced by City Attorney Penman.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ADOPTING THE
1995/96 TO 1999/2000 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. (21)
Council Member Oberhelman made a motion, seconded
Member Miller, and unanimously carried, that the
continued to April 15, 1996, in the Council Chambers of
300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California.
by Council
matter be
City Hall,
38
4/1/1996
RECONSIDER - DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT NO. 94-07 - FENCE
STANDARDS (23)
Council Member Negrete submitted a Staff Report
19, 1996, recommending reconsideration of the action
Mayor and Common Council meeting of March 18, 1996,
Development Code Amendment No. 94-07 regarding fence
dated March
taken at the
relative to
standards.
Ruben Lopez, 631 W. 16th Street, San Bernardino, CA, submitted
an undated letter stating he was against changing the chain link
fencing code.
Council Member Oberhelman made a motion, seconded
Member Miller, and unanimously carried, that the
continued to April 15, 1996, in the Council Chambers of
300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California.
by Council
matter be
ci ty Hall,
WAIVE FEES - BASELINE AREA BUSINESS ASSOCIATION - ANNUAL
STREET FAIRE - MAY 10-12, 1996 - COUNCIL MEMBER CURLIN
(24)
Council Member Curlin submitted a Staff Report dated March 25,
1996, regarding the waiver of all fees connected with the Annual
Street Faire sponsored by the Baseline Area Business Association,
to be held May 10-12, 1996.
Council Member Oberhelman made a motion, seconded
Member Miller, and unanimously carried, that the
continued to April 15, 1996, in the Council Chambers of
300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California.
by Council
matter be
City Hall,
CITY SUPPORT
NEIGHBORHOOD &
SUPPORT STAFF
VOLUNTEER CODE EDUCATION
BUSINESS ASSOCIATIONS - ALLOCATE
LOCAL
FUNDS &
(27)
Mayor Minor submitted a Staff Report dated March 25, 1996,
regarding active staff support of code education efforts for the
City's neighborhood and business associations.
Letters supporting the volunteer code education program for
local neighborhood and business associations were received from
Freddie Spellacy, Director, Neighborhood Cluster Associations, and
the following individual neighborhood associations: 30/40
Neighborhood, Arrowhead Neighborhood, Central Neighborhood, NIA
Neighborhood, Hudson Park Neighborhood, Muscupiabe Neighborhood,
North Park Neighborhood, Perris Hill Neighborhood, San Bernardino
High School Neighborhood, San Gorgonio Neighborhood, Shandin Hills
Neighborhood, and Verdemont Neighborhood.
Letters were received from the following groups and businesses
in support of the code education program:
39
4/1/1996
Holiday Oldsmobile-Mazda,
Bernardino, CA.
1388
South
"Ell
Street,
San
Northern Gateway Business Association, P.O. Box 9811, San
Bernardino, CA.
Del Rosa
Bernardino, CA,
Neighborhood Action Group, P.O.
submitted with 75 signatures.
Box
30750,
San
Council Member Oberhelman made a motion, seconded
Member Miller, and unanimously carried, that the
continued to April 15, 1996, in the Council Chambers of
300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California.
by Council
matter be
City Hall,
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE
AMENDMENT OF CONTRACT WITH MUNICIPAL RESOURCE CONSULTANTS
(MRC) TO INCLUDE REVENUE ENHANCEMENT AND AUDITING
SERVICES. (25)
Council Member Oberhelman made a motion,
Member Negrete, that the matter be continued.
date specified.)
seconded by Council
(Note: There was no
Council Member Negrete removed his second.
The motion failed for lack of a second.
City Administrator Shauna Clark stated that there was a short
window for approval of this item because there is a specific time
period wherein the City can apply to the State of California for
reimbursement for this program. The program is self funding, with
most money coming from state reimbursement.
Discussion ensued regarding the deadline for filing the
estimate with the State of California and the fact that the
amendment to the contract with MRC did not have to be approved in
order to submit the estimate to the State.
City Administrator Shauna Clark
authorize Barbara Pachon, Director of
paperwork with the State and postpone
contract amendment.
suggested that Council
Finance, to file the
a decision on the MRC
Council Member Oberhelman made a motion, seconded by Council
Member Devlin, and unanimously carried, that the Director of
Finance be authorized to file an estimate for State reimbursement
for this proposal; and that the matter be referred to the Ways and
Means Committee and continued to April 15, 1996, in the Council
Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino,
California.
40
4/1/1996
RES. 96-86 - RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
AWARDING A FINANCING CONTRACT TO FORD MOTOR CREDIT
COMPANY FOR THE FINANCING OF FIFTEEN (15) POLICE
VEHICLES, TO BE UTILIZED BY THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. (S3)
Council Member Negrete made a motion, seconded by Council
Member Anderson, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. 96-86 was adopted by the following vote:
Council Members Negrete, Curlin, Arias, Oberhelman,
Anderson, Miller. Nays: None. Absent: None.
Ayes:
Devlin,
APPROVE GENERAL FUND APPROPRIATION - CITY ATTORNEY BUDGET
- FUND OUTSIDE ATTORNEY & LITIGAT:ON COSTS (22)
City Attorney Penman submitted a Staff Report dated March 21,
1996, requesting approval of an appropriation from the General Fund
to the City Attorney's budget to pay existing bills for litigation
and to pay litigation costs for the remainder of fiscal year
1995/1996.
Ci ty Attorney Penman pointed
indicate the money coming from the
General Fund Reserves, as indicated
out that the motion should
General Fund rather than the
on the agenda.
Council Member Negrete made a motion, seconded by Council
Member Devlin, that the Finance Director be instructed to transfer
$347,525 from the General Fund to the following City Attorney
budget accounts: Litigation-Outside Attorney (001-051-3049)
$279,425 and Litigation (001-051-3050) $68,100 to fund all
outstanding services as of October 16, 1995 (per bill received
March 14, 1996) and services through June 30, 1996. (Note: There
was no vote taken on this motion.)
Council Member Miller suggested that the matter be continued
until Council had a chance to ascertain the budgetary effects of
taking the money from the General Fund.
Council Member Miller made a substitute motion that the matter
be continued to April 15, 1996, in the Council Chambers of City
Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California.
The motion failed for lack of a second.
City Attorney Penman stated that some bills had already been
received that required immediate payment and more bills would be
forthcoming.
City Administrator Shauna Clark suggested
separate approval for paying the bills from the
the money would come from.
that the Council
decision of where
41
4/1/1996
Council Member Negrete made a motion, seconded by Council
Member Miller, and unanimously carried, that the Finance Director
be instructed to pay the outside attorney fees and litigation costs
as they accrue.
RES. 96-87 - RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
IMPLEMENTING A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND EMPLOYEES IN THE GENERAL
EMPLOYEES' BARGAINING UNIT OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
REPRESENTED BY SAN BERNARDINO CITY EMPLOYEES'
ASSOCIATION. (28)
Council Member Devlin made a motion, seconded by Council
Member Negrete, that said resolution be adopted.
Resolution No. 96-87 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes:
Council Members Negrete, Curlin, Arias, Oberhelman, Devlin,
Anderson, Miller. Nays: None. Absent: None.
APPROVE ALLOCATION OF FUNDS - $30,000 - INSTALL CATCH
BASINS & STORM DRAIN - PERSHING AVENUE & 48TH STREET
(S4)
Council Member Oberhelman submitted a Staff Report dated March
19, 1996, regarding the allocation of funds for installation of
catch basins and storm drain at Pershing Avenue and 48th Street.
Council Member Devlin made a motion, seconded by Council
Member Anderson, and unanimously carried, that the expenditure of
$30,000, from Account No. 248-000-3405, "Undesignated Balance, n for
the installation of catch basins and storm drain at Pershing Avenue
and 48th Street, be approved.
ADJOURNMENT
At 10:42 p.m., the regular meeting was adjourned.
meeting of the Mayor and Common Council will be held at
Monday, April 15, 1996, in the Council Chambers of City
North "Dn Street, San Bernardino, California.
(30)
The next
8:00 a.m,
Hall, 300
RACHEL CLARK
CITY CLERK
BY
L Il~~
Linda Hartzel
Deputy City Clerk
No. of Items: 39
No. of Hours: 12.5
42
4/1/1996