Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Min 1999-06-07 5-24-99 I 6-7-99 I spoke favorably of having an ad hoc committee to review them. As to the attendance of his wife at this meeting, he apologized for her having to do that, and noted that he is much more accepting of the public interest if given calm arguments and logic behind a position rather than irate behavior, by virtue of his profession he has found that the most successful people in dealing with life saving situations are those who think calmly rather than doing something quickly, rather, think about what can be done to make change and that is likely to be more successful. Councilman Boyd noted that there were press releases today with regard to the east beach grand reopening on Wednesday at 1:00 p.m., this after the replenishment of the beach, at that time some of the City's representatives will be thanked for their assistance in making the project happen. CLOSED SESSION The City Attorney announced that the Council would meet in Closed Session pursuant to Government Code Section 54957 to discuss the item identified on the agenda relating to personnel matters. The Council adjourned to Closed Session at 9:31 p.m. and reconvened at 9:59 p.m. The City Attorney reported the Council had discussed the item previously identified, no action was taken. I ADJOURNMENT By unanimous consent, the Council adjourned the meeting until Monday, June 7th at 7:30 p.m. for a budget workshop. It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to adjourn the meeting at 10:01 p.m. Approved: Jr Mayor Attest: Seal Beach, California June 7, 1999 I The City Council of the City of Seal Beach met in regular adjourned session at 7:30 p.m. with Mayor Yost calling the meeting to order with the Salute to the Flag. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Yost Councilmembers Boyd, Campbell, Snow Absent: Councilman Doane I \ 6-7-99 It was announced that Councilman Doane was unable to attend the meeting due to a physical problem. Boyd moved, second by Campbell, to excuse the absence of Councilman Doane from this meeting. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Boyd, Campbell, Snow, Yost None Doane Motion carried I Also present: Mr. Till, City Manager Mr. Whittenberg, Director of Development Services Mr. Badum, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Chief Sellers, Police Department Captain Maiten, Police Department Ms. Stoddard, Director of Administrative Services Ms. Beard, Director of Recreation and Parks Ms. Yeo, City Clerk APPROVAL OF AGENDA Boyd moved, second by Campbell, to approve the order of the agenda as presented. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Boyd, Campbell, Snow, Yost None Doane Motion carried It was noted that at the prior workshop the Council reviewed the revenue projections however the Capital Improvement program budget was not. At this session the consensus was to commence review of proposed expenditures department by department. I * City Council - the City does not belong to SCAG, the Southern California Association of Governments, therefore why is there an appropriation for dues; response was that it is believed this gives the City lobbying power even though the City does not regularly attend meetings, the dues are $1600 and it is felt membership may be beneficial when something like the Housing Element issue comes up; question - if the Housing Element is revised what does SCAG have to do with that, what legislative benefit is there by being a member, is the City not as effective by not belonging; this is not so much a lobbying activity as it is technical, reports from the organization are reviewed, in the past they have provided the housing needs assessment however next year that will be done by the County COG; noted that second largest city in Orange County does not belong, membership in the League is probably equally important because of the COG; question was posed if the City could join if the need arose; response was that is likely; I * Question raised as to why the Council travel appropriation was increased to $10,000 as compared to years past ranging from $1,800 to $6,500; response was that it is believed that was a request by a number of Councilmembers last year, it is primarily in support of lobbying efforts, the City may realize a million plus dollars as a result of a I I I 6-7-99 * recent trip that cost a little more than $500, this is going to be an active legislative year, funds should be available for travel when felt necessary to bring home tax dollars; it was noted that the 1999 League Conference will be in San Jose, last year was Long Beach, thus additional costs will be incurred; mentioned that round trip travel and lodging to Washington, D.C. for three persons will run about $2,000; suggested that the amount remain in the budget, possibly all will not be spent; suggestion too that the amount be reduced to $7,500 to which there appeared to be agreement; Promotional - mentioned that thank you cards were imprinted last year for personal Councilmember use, paid from campaign funds, the budget reflects $500 for similar purchase, about $100 per member however two hundred fifty cards run about $140, therefore suggestion was made that the appropriation be increased to $1,000; * Pointed out that the budget reflects $500 for town hall meetings, about $100 per member of the Council depending on the type of facility, refreshments, etc., should possibly be doubled if the desire is to hold more than one; this was countered with comments that use of City facilities involve no costs; suggested then that the allocation of $500 remain; * City Manager - how many full time employees, answer was four; noted $8,200 proposed for office supplies, question if that could be reduced somewhat; each department has budgeted between $6,000 to $10,000 for office supplies, including the non-departmental budget with $28,000; the idea is that Council should be directing staff to spend less on administrative items where those monies could be funneled into capital improvements or reserves; response was that staff tries to be as reasonable as possible with such expenditures, sometimes expenditures are lower as is likely the case this year; the line items of the budget were reviewed and if there was an increase in excess of about one and a half percent the department was requested to complete a form explaining the expenditure amount; the attempt is always to come in under budget; * Reference made to accounts 43400, Training/ Meetings/Mileage, and 44600, Automobile Allowance, question as to whether there was any duplication; the response was that the first includes mileage reimbursement as well as training and meeting expenses for persons within a department, the second is a flat monthly amount to certain employees according to employee agreements; * It was confirmed that the cost for fingerprinting and background checks for new employees is about $3,000 per year; * City Clerk - it was said there has been need for a deputy clerk for a number of years, in the absence of the clerk there is no one to accept subpoenas, 6-7-99 certify documents, etc. and there needs to be; in the past there has been a deputy, that person retired, the time frame of that coincided with the period when the State was taking away substantial monies from cities, other departments were required to reduce their budgets by several percentages, in the case of the Clerk's office that position was left vacant as a cost reduction means, it has remained vacant to date; there are and have been two part time employees that basically answer telephones, do copying, research, etc., this has meant a considerable savings on the part of the City over the years; the workload is such that one person can not do it; as to hiring a deputy city clerk part time it is not felt possible to get the quality or caliber of person that is needed on a part time basis, confirmed that it is desirable to have someone to train in the position, that can not be accomplished in a month or two; the Council was provided a survey of compensation for deputy city clerk positions in other cities; it was noted that there is no knowledge of a city that does not have a deputy or assistant city clerk; concern was expressed with the lack of a deputy or assistant should the Clerk become ill or otherwise unable to be at work, also succession planning; it was pointed out as well that the Charter provides that the Clerk shall reside in the community; it was suggested that the budget review continue, if savings can be realized then consider again the hiring of a deputy city clerk; suggestion also that if some savings are found such hiring could be deferred for a period of possibly six months, too, concern was expressed that a well qualified person may presently be employed in a full time position and not give consideration to part time; there are a number of backlogged projects in the Clerk's office, there is and has been no opportunity to deal with them, some held for a number of years, of greatest concern is bringing things up to date; mention was made that the budget of the City Clerk is quite lean as compared to others; I I * With regard to City emblem pins, it was reported that a small quantity is being purchased through the current year budgeted funds; * In reference to the Election Account - indicated that the appropriation of $60,000 should be adequate at this point in time, the actual cost can not be estimated until there is more precise information as to the number of candidates, measures, citywide or by district, etc.; * City Attorney - noted a substantial drop in legal expenses from $365,893 in 1997/98 to $298,200 in 1998/99; a drop in general prosecution from $60,000 to $20,000, the reason, in part, was due to Code violations that went as far as the courts; noted that if a fine for Code violations is initiated the prosecution burden will likely be lessened further; with regard to litigation costs relating to the Bixby project, it was explained those costs will be the responsibility of the land owner; I I I I 6-7-99 * Finance Department - question with regard to account 49500, machinery/equipment 1 response was business license software, a reimbursable cost under SB 901 noted that the proposed 1999/2000 budget is basically the same as the current fiscal year, the audit cost increased pursuant to provisions of a four year contract, audit proposed of the utility users tax to assure all is being captured, explained that account 43900, special departmental, reflects only the outside payroll and armored car services 1 Non-departmental - the increased budget by about $50,000 was questioned, office supplies by $3,000, training/meetings/mileage by about $2,500, equipment and materials up by $7,500, special departmental by $11,000, contract professional services by about $40,0001 concern was expressed with appropriation of monies in a general or non- departmental budget 1 employee costs reflect the group medical for retirees 1 office supplies are reflected as $28,000 with an explanation of office supplies citywide yet there are office supply costs reflected in the departments as welll explanation was that the office expense figure reflects all envelopes, paper, copier paper, framed resolutions, proclamations, toner, budget, business card masters, file folders, etc.l it may be possible to reduce the 431 account to $25,000 because some things have been included in the Council budget however the current year budget of $28,000 has already been exceeded 1 there is now a better understanding of the function of the 431 account 1 * As to account 43400, training/ meetings/mileage, was explained as another source for unscheduled trips if necessary 1 consensus was that 43400 be reduced from $10,000 to $7,5001 * * In reference to account 43900, special departmental, the $10,800 for leased office space was questioned 1 the response was that that relates to cramped and noisy quarters on the second floor of City Hall in the Public Work/Engineering section 1 there have been complaints about the noise from the copier 1 there are offices vacant on the second floor of the historic city hall building, it is felt that a fair lease could be negotiated for that space, probably for less than it would cost to lease mini-storage 1 the thought is to move the copier to the old building as well as utilize some room for storagel this possibly a one time opportunity 1 question was posed as to what is planned for the existing copier area in City Halll the response was to make it into office space with a quieter work environment 1 it was mentioned that this is about the only city that does not have offices for councilmembersl the space in the old building would be a secured area to the City Hall side of the cable studio 1 there was counter to the comments stating that the existing copy area is not that noisYl the use was again questioned in that two part time employees are no longer with the CitYl opinion was expressed that the expenditure of $10,800 could not be supported when the intent is 6-7-99 * to find a means to cut the utility tax, the intent of this review is to increase revenues, decrease expenditures, increase reserves, and fix what is broken; it might be nice to have less cramped space but that is Seal Beach; what is in the storage room is questionable, does it need to be kept or does it simply need to be cleaned out; concern was expressed with spending this money as proposed; to question if a noise study has been done the response was no yet there have been complaints from employees; question too as to why not put someone in the office space at the Public Works Yard; the response was that it is not efficient to put the engineers and support staff at a remote location; this office is being proposed for the Assistant City Engineer who also serves as the Street Supervisor thus it would be good if that person were located where those employees are, that is the Public Works Yard; the recommendation was to delete the expansion, that additional office space not be leased; question was raised again as to a noise study, to that it was mentioned that there is a dividing wall, double paned glass, one window backed with plywood to provide more privacy; mentioned that each time consideration is given to additional office space there is an additional burden on the budget; it was offered that this item could either be scaled back or a better price could be negotiated, maybe for $8,500, this was looked at as an opportunity while the space is available; Question as to what is the $10,000 expenditure in account 43700, equipment materials/supplies/ services; response was to set up a disaster preparedness account, there is nothing in the way of emergency preparedness supplies, stocking of the Emergency operations Center; it was stated that there is no similar item in the police budget; account 439 questioned with regard to awards and recognitions, is this a duplication of the Council budget item, explanation was this would be over and above regular recognitions; account 44200, rental/lease equipment, $25,000; it was noted that the GTE phone system needs to be added to that account; question of account 45100, contract professional services for $20,000, what are the consulting contracts; response was that amount is in the event services are needed during the year, confirmed that the contract of Del Smith for lobbyist services is included under this account, MSI is Management Information Systems, management of the computer system, the $54,000 figure is for half time services between the police Department, Public Works, City Hall, and Lifeguards, this is on a month to month basis based upon the proposal of the provider; there is a plan to evaluate the possibility of a program to share this position with WestComm communications at the Police Department, possibly the same service but for less, at this point in time with the current computerization and link of the departments there is need for a system administrator; it was indicated that account 43900, the leased office space will be considered at a later time; I I I I I I 6-7-99 * Police Field Services - noted that the request is for about $500,000 less; explanation was that that is due to reorganization and the split of some services with Police Support; the Department was commended for the reduction of overtime; * Police Support - this budget amount increased as a result of the reorganization, services shifted; question of the increase of account 48200, Intergovernmental, by about $50,000; explained that that is due to the increase of the contract with the West Covina Police Department, the City presently contracts with them for the computer aided dispatch and records management system, they are in the process of upgrading their system and Seal Beach has incurred a considerable increase of the annual contract, there is nothing new it is just the cost, the system is also going to mobil data terminals, most of that will be covered by a grant yet the City needs to pick up some of the differential, thus a cost increase for the existing contract and a new contract for the mobil data terminals; it was noted that the City is looking at alternatives to that as well; * Beach Parking - inquiry with regard to accounts 46801 and 46802, principal and interest expense, Beach/Pier Improvements; response was that is a portion of the financing of the 800 MHz where additional monies were realized for part of the Main Street improvements; * Fire Services - a conservative estimated increase of $150,000 this year, next year could be $450,000, that due to increased utilization, 1999/2000 budget is $2.6 million; confirmed that that does include 911 calls for paramedic services; question, if the number of 911 requests impacts the cost; response was basically yes, the contract cost is based upon assessed valuation and utilization, as utilization rises so does the contract cost; alternatives are being looked at, one could be getting into the emergency transportation business with the Fire Authority, that would require a budget outlay to purchase a vehicle, some cities have done that which in turn has reduced their contract costs; the equity issue is primary at this time, as of a month ago it appeared that the City would be responsible for about another half million per year, the revised figure as of today is about $150,000 for next year however the costs could continue to rise in subsequent years, that is one reason for the necessity to find new revenue and save existing revenue; question if any avenues are foreseen to reduce that cost; response was possibly the emergency transport services, that might return $150,000 per year, if the City were to go that direction, which can only be done through the Fire Authority, a subscription plan could be implemented to offset costs to the residents; * Noted that there have been some benefits to the City through the Fire contract also, the City does not pay for equipment replacement or facilities, so the Authority is proposing the additional cost of 6-7-99 $150,000 next year, the concern is with the cost in the years after 2000~ to offset some of those costs will require some major policy considerations~ * Animal Control - the reduction of personnel from two to one and a half was noted~ a saving of about $45,000~ question if there is consideration of two part time persons, this is a reduction of staffing level to what it was in years past~ it is not thought possible to replace one full time with two part time~ it was noted the City may be eligible for reimbursement under 5B 1785 which mandates some of the things the City does in terms of animal control, collection services, maintenance and operation of the shelter, cities of this size realize about $8,000 to $10,000 per year, this will be on the next Council agenda requesting a letter to the City's legislators to pursue reimbursement under SB 90 for mandated services~ I * Planning Services - the decreased budget of about $20,000 was noted~ question with regard to account 43100, office supplies, in the amount of $9,000, historically the amount has been about $8,500, yet the amount seems to be considerable for a department of two people~ noted that things such as professional and technical publications, drafting supplies, map reproduction, etc. tend to be expensive items, also, the amounts have not increased much, are in line with past years~ explanation was that the primary cost in account 43100 is postage, there are mailed notices for public hearings in connection with applications, an example would be Hellman and Bixby where seven to eight hundred notices are sent at thirty-three cents each, also, the general office expenses include files, etc. that are set up for each application~ as to account 43700, that is for maintenance agreements for the computer systems, labeling machine, microfiche machine~ question, if there are computer costs in each department then what is the contract for with MI5~ explanation, in the Planning/Building there are software programs that have service agreements as opposed to equipment installation/maintenance~ I * Building and Safety - office ,supplies, account 43100, recommended reduction by $2,500, no action taken~ question, account 45100, plan check, $44,000 per year, suggestion was to have been to contract this service, informed that this is by contract, is a hundred percent refundable through the building permits, the hope had been an on-site plan check for quick turn around rather than a period of thirty days~ response was that the first turn around on a plan check is seven days~ I * With reference to data in both the Fire Authority and the Sanitation District monthly reports, it would be nice to have statistics on the number of plans submitted, first phase and subsequent completions, permits issued, turn around time, etc.~ response was that that information could be provided Council on a monthly basis~ noted that that information would assist Council in responding I I I 6-7-99 to residents who have plans in the processl also, the amount of time to process plans is actually a measurement of customer service to the citizensl * Public Works/Engineering - reference to account 45100, $15,000, inquiry as to why plan check review contained in this budget as welll the figure shown in the budget is actually recovered from the applicants, it is the actual cost plus some overhead 1 question too relating to the traffic engineer and the streets, storm drain retainersl response was that this is a monetary set aside, there are a number of requests relating to drainage problems as an example which requires an engineer to do a field check, survey of elevations, etc. to determine if the problem can be resolved outside, typically that is contracted out because it involves specialized expertisel to the traffic engineer there are times when a citizen or group or neighborhood that requests a speed surveyor analysis of a situation of concernl account 45100 covers those costs, if no requests the money is not usedl * Explained that the question was asked because the City has more engineers now than it has ever had, thus it seems redundant to contract for another engineering service, for years there was a contract part time engineer and no public works directorl in support it was stated that their workload is seen daily as well as the number of directions they are being pulled, the demands and time lines are intense, this is in-lieu of more full time staffl mention was made of the number of projects that this Council has requested in the past yearl counter response was in those cases someone from outside has been hired at a cost of hundreds of thousands of dollarsl there are two staff and one contract engineer, is their time being used most efficientlYl it was mentioned that some of the problems being realized now stems from the time when there was a contract part time engineer1 pointed out also the time required to meet with other agencies for the purpose of coordination, funding sources, etc.1 mention too that the issue of liability needs to be kept in mindl staff stated that the amounts are consistent with past budgets, even before the newer projects, there are things that come up that need attention in a timely manner, the City is also getting involved in pursuing more funding sources and regional issues, not only projects but the workload has increased in the other areas as welll with the notation of the office supply budget of $3,700, it was pointed out that a great deal of their expenditures come from capital projects, with that supply costs are reduced 1 * Storm Drains - no questions1 * Street Maintenance/Cleaning - account 45100, $24,000 relating to trash collection on Main Street and City parks1 question, how is that done currently 1 in the past there was overtime budgeted in the Public Works account that was no where near 6-7-99 $24,000, and the number of employees is not being reduced I response was that the Strategic Financial Plan references a time management type study that was done for Public Works/Engineering where it was found that city crews were spending incredible amounts of time on trash collection, which translates to cost; the intent was to contract out for that with Briggeman who has the equipment and knowledge of how to do that; rather than lay people off they would be reassigned to other areas or do backlogged projects, beach cleaning, sidewalk repairs, etc.; the cost to contract versus in-house was a big difference I question, how is this going to affect the service level, do the current personnel do a good job, can Briggeman do it better, will the trash cans actually get emptied and cleaned, is it going to be as cost effective to have Briggeman pick up the trash I the overtime costs last year were $5,900, that is a $19,000 cost difference; cleaning Main Street on weekends is a concern; if a cost allocation study is done to look at all aspects, salary, benefits, equipment, maintenance, etc., the number of man hours, compare that with the cost of the private sector, if it is less it makes sense; compromise was to support the private service as a one year only pilot program, to also include collection on weekends; I * Question of account 46800, lease payments; explanation was 1997/98 was the last payment on the sweeper, it is now the bucket truck and skiploader; I * By means of telephone, Councilman Doane made reference to Landscape Maintenance, account 43900, $56,000 seems to be a significant amount, it does not seem that the trees need to be trimmed to that extent every year, would suggest that that amount be reduced; response was that the current tree trimming contract is $50,000, this a $6,000 increase, this is for street trees only, not park trees; evidence of the aggressive street tree trimming program can be seen by the fact that there were no damages at a result of trees during the two major storms this past season, one of the few cities in Orange County that had no trees go down; this is a two to three year trim cycle, this is about the level of service that should be provided for the safety of the residents; * A complaint received a couple of years ago was with the type of trimming of the Main Street trees, with that schedule the only way to make the trimming last for two years was to trim more severely, by this program the trimming is less severe while keeping them under control; I * Current contract obligation is for $50,000 worth of tree trimming per yearl request had been for a reduction of possibly $6,000; suggestion however that possibly an option could be to do some of the park trees internally that could reduce the costl the large palm trees in Old Town are trimmed yearly as is Main Street; this contract provides some leeway for trees where there are problems with limbs, etc., also trees in Gum Grove that appear to I I I 6-7-99 be dangerous, there is a current project by Beverly Manor where it will cost about $4,000 to have them trimmed which is not in the normal contract, the extra $6,000 will cover that1 noted that the budget for 1998/99 was $59,000, it is currently $56,5001 Councilman Doane made reference to over trimming of trees in Leisure World, however understood the justification1 * Question was posed as to the schedule of trimming the trees in the Lampson Avenue median, the eucalyptus that traditionally drop branches if not pruned properlY1 response was that that schedule was uncertain 1 * Reference made to employee services, 1996/97 about $14,000 for part time, $22,600 for 1997/98, estimated and requested is $20,000, with the mowing contract it is thought that a large percentage of time of those employees was dedicated to mowing, question, with that contract can the part time services be reduced 1 response was much like tree trimming, that adds up to about five hundred fifty hours which means there is not that much extra service 1 further response was that the crew is now down to three plus the field supervisor, that through attrition and the contracting of mowing services, with that number of personnel the only way they can accomplish the jobs is through part time help1 over time there may be more contracts or requests for more full time personnel1 with reference to the personnel recap, there is a Supervisor, then why is there a Leadperson who likely also performs supervisory tasks, and then three people, the span of control seeming to be top heavy 1 the Leadperson is a working crew person not a supervisory position1 it needs to be kept in mind that the Supervisor is also supervising a tree contract of about $50,000, a janitorial contract of about $50,000, as well as the upcoming mowing and edging contract of about $100,000, thus there is a multitude of contract employees being supervised that are new to staff1 it was noted that the intent had been to reduce the part time from $20,000 to $15,000, the thought had been to reduce some of the part time with the mowing contract, where about two-thirds of the time of those employees is now spent 1 comment was made that this is directly proportionate to the service that the community seeS1 * Fleet Maintenance - question of account 43900, special departmental, up $15,0001 response was that the price of gas went from $.98 to about $1.50, now about $1.351 mentioned that the Fire Authority budget went up also due to the cost of fuel1 there was inquiry if there is a saving with the electric vehicles, the response was affirmative. * It was noted that some years back the City was ready to dispose of its 1929 LaFrance Fire Engine, the Volunteers acquired it from the City for virtually nothing, the Volunteers spent about $15,000 restoring it, putting about $3,000 to $4,000 into it each year1 the City has participated 6-7-99 with some limited preventative maintenance due to the lack of funds and personnel time; the Volunteers just replaced some parts for about $2,000, 1929 parts mostly need to be custom made; the request is for City participation in additional maintenance in an amount of about $1,500, at this point the vehicle is ready to stop running, needs additional work; justification is that it is a piece of living history for the City, is used in the parades and other community activities, this is the first fire engine purchased by the City, as an example the City and Fire Association in Orange spend $30,000 annually to maintain their vintage engine; the Volunteers hold an annual fund raising event and continue to spend $3,000 to $4,000 annually for its upkeep, at this point it needs two new wheels which will likely be $2,000; there was an indicated consensus to fund maintenance of the LaFrance in an amount of $1,000; offer of personal contributions was also made; I * Building Maintenance - account 43500, building materials/supplies, $31,000; explanation was building cleaning services, unanticipated building repair, the air conditioning as an example; question, has the Building Department inspected the building for unanticipated problems; response was termite treatment, repair of the stairways, leaking roof, etc.; recommendation was to reduce to $25,000; noted that as part of the janitorial contract the City is to provide the paper products and supplies; some agreement indicated to cap 43500 at $25,000 and if more is needed that would be a future consideration; I * With regard to account 45100, contracts for heating, air conditioning, and elevator services, $23,000, maintenance thereof; miscellaneous services of $13,000 is for uniform cleaning, etc.; * Signal Maintenance - question, is not a contract being considered for signal maintenance; response was yes however not anticipated to be done this year; explained that there is a plan, there are some Measure M monies to redo a substantial number of signals, once that is complete and the equipment is up to date, that would be the time to contract; the current system is much different from others; the new system is anticipated to start this fiscal year; there have been discussions of contracting out with adjacent cities such as Huntington Beach, they would not be interested until there is an upgraded system; * Transfers Out - no comments; I * Street Lighting Fund - there is an assessment district for street lighting; within that program there is a contract for professional services, attorney and consultant fees of $9,750, what is that and why; response was that the contract is with Willdan Associates, administration of the assessment district, they prepare the reports and maps, work with the County on behalf of the City; question, does it change that much each year that I I I 6-7-99 requires that amount of expenditure, it is thought it would be consistent; explained that the way it is set up by the County it must be done annually; * Question - under the same laws would this allow assessments for curbs, gutters, tree trimming, etc.; response was street lighting is the most common, this is a pass through cost for electricity; the costs for tree trimming on the water bill does not come close to covering the actual costs where the street lighting does; Seal Beach is minimal in terms of assessments; with the utility tax it would be thought that there would be zero taxes on other items; mentioned also that the charge for tree trimming covers the trees throughout the City from which all persons benefit, not just a tree in front of a residence as some people think; * Public Liability Insurance - noted that account number 45201 provides for payment on certain overdue legal expenses; those bills are being paid down; to question regarding account number 45200, explained that that is the total liability insurance premium not just the wave runners and hull insurance; with regard to being self-insured, explained that an appropriation is made based upon an estimate of claims for the year, the City pays into the OCCRMA pool; noted increased total appropriation for public liability, question, are ways being looked at to reduce that fund; * Workers Compensation Insurance - no comments; * Solid Waste Management - it was noted that the City will be asked to pay $24,000 for Briggeman to dispose of trash from Main Street and in the parks, the question is going to be posed why the business owners are not assessed for that service; can that be done; the response was supposedly it could however that is part of the public service for the Main Street pedestrian walkway; in reference to account 45100, contract/professional services, the items add to $873,800, the question, where is the balance of $21,200; response was belief that the description was not updated to present day, should be Briggeman Franchise Agreement only; the contract is a pass-through, question of that was why, why not have them collect and the City merely audit, it takes time of staff; response was that a fee is collected from Briggeman to cover administrative costs, it is believed collection was set up in that manner to create an accountability; collection for commercial is now being done by Briggeman, there is some savings; question was raised if the fee paid by Briggeman completely offsets the City cost, the response was yes; comment was made that this is a service that the citizens look to the City to provide and be responsible for, if collection were changed that could pose a problem; the response was yes to an inquiry as to whether this takes into consideration the fact that one-third of the population pays for their own refuse collection; * Supplemental Law Enforcement - no comments; 6-7-99 * Detention Facilities - question was why the increase of expenses; it was noted that this represents a fee for service, there is an actual $120,000 per year profit; * Air Quality Improvement - explained that this sets forth the funds for the Leisure World bus service to the Rossmoor Center, the budget proposes investigation of service to Main Street under the same funding; I * Environmental Reserve - question of account 43900, what is the Assessor information database being transferred for; explanation was that as part of the City's GIS layers of information the Assessor information will be downloaded for each parcel in the City, providing parcel number, ownership information, size and age of the dwelling, numbers of bedrooms, bathrooms, etc., first of all it allows the preparation of notification lists quickly, then that process will not be done by an individual when an application is submitted, it will be done by the City rather than spending staff time to verify that it has been done correctly; mentioned that staff has waited for this type of system for a long time; with regard to account 45100 for participation in off-shore oil ban consortium, concern was expressed with possibly sponsoring a ban on offshore oil drilling with taxpayer money; explanation was that last year the City participated with other coastal communities in Orange County to lobby in Washington, D. C. to effectuate that type of legislation; one objection was made to such an expenditure with taxpayer dollars, there are others fighting that issue, this amount of money would make no difference, the City could take a stand but no monetary contribution; there were opposing opinions expressed; I * Recreation Services/Sports/Aquatics Funds - no comments; * Park Improvement - account 45100, noted that the $30,000 for the relocation of the Luraschi house was generated from the Park In-Lieu program, was the result of subdivision of lots some three or four years ago, the funds are restricted for recreation type facilities, the proposal had been to relocate the house as part of the Hellman project, the monies are rolled over each year, there is a historical interest by some residents; argument was made that when it is seen that monies are needed for improvements to the community centers, etc., yet this would take general fund monies from the capital improvement program that could otherwise be used for greater needs, the expenditure of $30,000 to move an old house that will in turn probably require another $100,000 to $150,000 to repair is not in reason; the owner is ready to dispose of this house; it was again mentioned that there are a number of persons in the community wishing to preserve this house; there was suggestion that there may be other sources of funds, alternatives, to save this dwelling without City funds; this may be better funded privately; I I I I 6-7-99 * Tideland Beach - account 45100, Y2K compliance, the $3,000 covers programming, software, etc., question, account 44000, gas, electric, and telephone expense, $15,000, that amount seems high, would suggest that a utility audit be done of all facilities; an audit has been done of this building, no report received as yet; * Beach Maintenance - noted that an upcoming request to the Los Angeles Board of Supervisors for additional funding is not included in the budget, will be included if approved; account 45100, engineering services, question, what is that for; response was as part of the environmental clearances for putting sand on the beach the City is required to do sand profiling and monitoring, also look at Surfside and if there is erosion Moffat and Nichol are contacted, this was a requirement of the Coastal Commission, a good practice as well, as to part time employees, the salaries have remained fairly consistent, one of their duties during the summer months is maintenance of the pier restrooms, question, it was understood that would be contracted out; response was that the idea was to defer more of that manpower back into beach cleaning, * Pier Maintenance - no comments; * TRAN Repayment - account 45100 - to question, response was that is the shared cost for underwriter and bond counsel services; * Parking Impact - account 43700, question as to the source of revenue for the Main Street signage; response was parking impact fees, previously known as in-lieu parking. By unanimous consent, a brief recess was called. PUBLIC COMMENTS Mayor Yost invited public comments from the audience. Mr. Cliff Meyer, Leisure World, commended the Council for their budget review, and he was not present to say that the City does not need more money. Mr. Meyer said he was present primarily with regard to the utility users tax, the people need a reduction of that tax, some are on fixed incomes, some have even turned off their circuit breaker. He made reference to a news article that reported an increase of sales tax to the point of making a noticeable difference, he would like to see the Council support Seal Beach as a place to live, the small town atmosphere is desirable, yet there should be a way to maintain that atmosphere and still have income to the City, as an example, the Department of Water and Power property would be a good hotel site that could produce more room tax. He asked if the staff has estimated the reduction of real estate taxes for persons of sixty-two years and older, it is likely an impact, and asked if the College Park tennis facility will require an unbudgeted expense from the General Fund, the response was that Bixby is giving $1 million with the turn over of the property for the maintenance of that facility, those monies to be placed in a special fund. Mr. Meyer referred to 1993/94 sales tax of $1.267 million, 1998 is $1.45, a small increase in five years, and 1999 is estimated at $1.585; utility users tax has 6-7-99 dropped, most likely blamed on the deregulation of the electric utility, yet there are cell phones, computer lines, etc. that have come in and would have some impact on additional income of the utility tax; noted an increase of public liability to $550,000, presuming considerable litigation the cause. To that the Mayor explained that is somewhat due to back payments for litigation services that I are being addressed. Mr. Meyer mentioned his understanding that filming activities are lucrative to a community; the response was that the referenced $550 is a permit only, there are additional fees and a requirement for payment of all costs for services. Mr. Meyer said it appears that license fees are dropping, suggesting that there will probably be a lot of new contractors coming in with the Bixby and Hellman projects that will need a license. Councilman Snow mentioned that reduction of the utility users tax is at the top of Councilman Doane's list, to that Mr. Meyer said he was aware, but there needs to be something to replace that money. Councilman Snow pointed out that not only the Towne Center but the hotel, senior care facility and the two restaurants will generate additional income, as will Mr. K's when opened. Mr. Meyer said anything that may be coming will be encouraging. Councilmember Campbell mentioned that the Seal Beach eleven percent utility users tax applies to electric, gas, and telephone only, not like other cities that apply it to water and cable as well, thus the eleven percent is not a true reflection, pointed out also that this City has recovered quite well since the time when the State took away one-sixth of the budget, about four million dollars, then there was the County bankruptcy. Councilman Boyd said that the Council is concerned with the utility users tax, about a I year ago his position had been that he would not cut it at that time because of not having knowledge of what the financial situation was or the ability to cut it. With regard to revenue sources sales tax was mentioned, to that Councilman Boyd noted that Seal Beach is behind the power curve in attracting retail trade, the trade area, that is the few miles around the City is inundated with big box stores with many shopping and retail opportunities that the City did not attract some years back, the trade area is narrow, and pursuant to the information distributed by Mr. Meyer, the median household income is shown as $40,200, this makes it difficult for the City to solicit retailers that will bolster the tax base. He mentioned too his understanding of a utility tax waiver for persons exceeding a certain age. The response was that a senior citizen exemption can be applied for by those persons sixty-five years and over having an annual income of $13,500 or less. It was noted that a one percent reduction of the utility users tax would be approximately $360,000. * Miscellaneous Grant Programs - no comments; * Assessment District 94-1 Debt service/Engineering Administration - no comments; I * Water Operations - there was question as to why the City still owns its water utility, has consideration ever been given to selling it; response was that that was looked at a couple of years ago, there was not a great benefit financially; suggestion was made that the Council consider this at some future time; I I I 6-7-99 Wastewater Operations - mentioned that transfers in relate to a request to the Orange County Sanitation District for a cooperative project; it was explained that the Sanitation District looked at their options to reduce or upgrade their capacity, one way is to reduce the inflow, working with cities and offering fifty percent funding to do those types of projects; application has been made for several projects, $25,000 for the sewer master plan, $16,000 for a GIS system, and about $130,000 for Old Town sewer main repairs, all in an effort to reduce the inflow into the sewer system which in turn improves the capacity; it was noted that all requests were approved; question, were the total funds budgeted or just the matching funds; response was that since this is a cooperative project, the new funds coming from the Sanitation District are shown and matched with capital project monies in the sewer fund; the sewer master plan is basically a reimbursement, becoming money that can go to other projects; · Community Redevelopment/Riverfront Project - no comments; . · RDA Debt Service - no comments; . RDA Tax Increment - account 46800, lease payments for the Los Alamitos School District, for what; response was the preschools and the ball field; . Appropriations Limit - no comments; · Capital Improvement Projects Detail - what is detailed is the 1999/2000 projects, shows the beginning CIP, how much is in reserves, how much is new, the amounts to be spent, and amounts to be held in reserve for future projects; the basis was the initial CIP where projects were identified to be addressed over that period of time; all of the projects for this year were not done, and when projecting for five years it is not known what the income will be for the period of time; . First item of discussion was under the heading of Public Works, Fuel Tanks Replacement at the City Yard, $150,000; at present the City is operating under a system where fuel is purchased at a discount through a local vendor; statement was that replacement of the fuel tanks and dispensing system are not necessary; reasons are, a large portion of the motor fleet is being replaced with compressed natural gas, there are new electric vehicles and more will be coming, it is likely there will be more dependency on compressed natural gas, and the purchasing of fuel with a card system tends to be working well, the Highway Patrol, the State, the Fire Department are doing it that waYl · Mentioned that the old tanks had been removed, replacement funds had been removed from the current year budget; recollection was that the determination was based on the fact that the bids were high; 6-7-99 * Explained that this was a previous year project, there was a mandate that the old ones had to come out, then question was raised if it made sense to spend that kind of money where fuel could be bought from local stations, there is no discount, it is not a major inconvenience except for some small equipment and machinery where it would be easier to have fuel tanks, probably save some time; one factor was the jump in prices at the retail level, also the broker that is located in town provides this kind of service, sales tax is generated at the point of sale, in other words the City pays sales tax and seventy percent is rebated back, that could be a significant savings, in the past the City has never used a broker to get the best price available; staff is still not prepared to say this is something that the City should do right now, there are still questions that need to be answered, no matter the answers there will be some additional costs to the City because on the basis of disaster preparedness there has to be a fuel supply for emergency response, having its own supply with backup generators is important, there may not be natural gas available at the time, an issue that has been discussed at the emergency planning meetings; it is a big ticket item but does have a return on investment over a period of time based upon the savings of fuel costs and rebate of sales tax, cost savings can be achieved on a per gallon basis this way; in any case it is known that the City would have to spend a good portion of this on above-ground tanks to serve as the backup supply in a disaster and the generators to go with them, that is something that is known must be done; of great concern also is the Public Works site remediation, some monies have been set aside, $10,000 last year, an additional $50,000 this year, that could end up being a small portion of the actual cost, at this point the County is allowing an incremental approach to the cleanup of the contaminated soil that is possibly there and if at any point they no longer go along with this approach then there could be some substantial costs; it is known that there is going to be additional costs, that may be for a new fuel tank if it pencils out and the Council agrees that is a good approach, if it does not go that way there will be additional costs anyway for a couple of above-ground tanks and generators and site remediation; this was the basis for rolling this appropriation over again; if this does not pencil and there is not satisfaction with the analysis that will be forthcoming then the tanks will not be bought; I I * Question was where are above-ground tanks going to be put; question too, why, when every other fuel dispenser in the City has tanks below ground; the City can do the same as all of the other State emergency services organizations and the County which is to purchase manual crank pumps to tap commercial tanks, the cost is about $600; in the case of a major emergency what is needed is taken and an emergency purchase order is issued to be dealt with later; the City should not think that it is going to be so totally self-sufficient it will I I I I 6-7-99 not have to tap the commercial resources locally~ there needs to be a policy that requires all City vehicles to be kept three-quarters full at all times and there is a mobile type trailerable tank to equal about fifteen hundred gallons, which is considerably less expensive, that would be more inclined for support~ there is adamant opposition to putting in an above ground stationery tank at the City Yard~ again the City fleet, in the next five years, will be nearly all compressed natural gas, there will also be the natural gas fueling station in the City~ * It was noted that backup options were discussed a year ago, also alternatives to underground tanks~ question to that was what has been done in this past year other than purchase fuel on the card system~ the point is, most major fleets today do not have their own fuel systems, they are card system participants~ * Concern expressed with regard to above ground tanks~ it was pointed out that a seven hundred fifty gallon tank is no larger than about six by three feet~ * preliminary numbers show a substantial savings by going with wholesale fuel purchases, about twenty percent or $17,000 per year~ taking the cost of the tanks with a life of about thirty years at four percent inflation, it is about the same per year~ if the cost is roughly equivalent the question is then what system is the City more comfortable with in regards to emergency response, convenience, etc.~ it is felt this should be looked at a little more in depthl there is agreement that it would be prudent to have this option remain available so that such decision can be made~ it was confirmed that there is no firm plan with the County for the clean up effort, thus there may be need for adjustment, this money could be used for that purpose~ * If the interest is retaining some money for a reserve contingency, $100,000 would be suggested should it be determined that the City needs its own fuel tanks, the other $50,000 for another priority project or the deputy clerk position~ it is felt the remediation will be the big problem, the fuel tank money will need to be used for that~ * It was recalled that fuel was a big problem after the Loma Priata earthquake, generators were used as an energy source~ of great importance will be the use of the emergency response vehicles~ the service stations are depleted rather quickly, especially if there is damage to the roads~ preference would be to have a better assessment of this issue~ noted that this was dealt with a year ago, question, when will there be a report or some action taken, there needs to be a final disposition on items such as the fuel tanks~ 6-7-99 * There was a reminder that there is only so much money, it needs to be decided how it is going to be dispersed; * Delaying a project in some cases may actually save money, especially now when construction costs are very high, sometimes up to thirty percent more; suggestion again to reserve $100,000 for now 1 response was that the latest estimate remains at $150,0001 I * Tidelands Fund - Beach, undergrounding of overhead wiring at the beach lots, tie that into the 8th Street beach lot resurfacing and parking lot improvements, those two projects amount to $65,0001 agreed that the beach lots are in bad shape yet they do not serve a single resident that the Council represents; it will not cost any more if delayed for a year, what is needed is a complete overlay or resurfacingl it would be nice to get this done but not at this timel the residents would be better served by fixing an alley, a street on the Hill, CPE cul-de-sacsl of the $65,000, suggestion that $30,000 be used for another priority project, hold the remaining $35,000 in reserve for the yearl it is assumed that the beach lot resurfacing and improvements would coincide with the undergrounding of wiring, $10,000, making the total $75,000, hold over the undergrounding as well, use that $10,000 elsewhere 1 I * First Street Restroom Repair, this at the Rivers End Cafe, $10,0001 suggestion was that the amount be reduced to $5,000 or $7,500 and seek some of the funding from the tenantl given the design of the roof at the Cafe, the birds like to roost there which creates a problem with droppings, it is believed the tenant has been addressing that with his own time and own moneYl the Cafe is open only certain hours of the day, by the agreement the City receives a percentage of the business done, in turn, the restrooms are open much longer than the business 1 * It was proposed that the construction of office space in City Hall be deleted completely, $6,000, this coincides with the lease of space in the Old City Hall; the total cost deletion would be $16,8001 * Noted that College Park East Improvements/Lampson Avenue, Parks and Recreation account 49697, this is just Bluebell Park not Lampson, the total should be $33,500 rather than $23,500; the Neighborhood Association as well is designating money in their park fund for Bluebell Park play equipmentl I * For the past two years there were monies being rolled over for Lampson Avenue, $20,000 and $20,000, $20,000 this year and next towards the ultimate project cost of $80,0001 the request, those monies be put back into the budget however for street improvements within the tract because money should be forthcoming from Bixby for Lampsonl I I I 6-7-99 * Question,_what is planned for Lampson; explained that Bixby is to provide $30,000 to remove the block wall by the Navy golf course and provide some landscaping; the median was being looked at for improvements given the number of accidents on the curve, an engineering study was done, it became clear that if anything is ever going to be done with the Lampson curve it will be if they ever decide to take Lampson into St. Cloud, which would be years away, if regraded then the water flows towards the houses; * Question, how much money is needed, how much is budgeted; response was $40,000 rolled over from the past two years, $20,000 this year, should be $60,000 at this point with another $20,000 next year; none is in the budget now, it was taken out; explanation was that the entire $33,500 was anticipated as being for the Lampson median, could be used for whatever; this is a budget balancing effort; * Question, do the Council Chamber seats really need to be reupholstered, the estimated amount is $15,000; * The City now has a Pavement Management Plan, the streets identified by traffic volume and rate of deterioration, comment was, should not deviate from that order; at present Harvard Lane is the street closest to failure, it must be done; there are just enough funds this year to do Harvard and the slurry program; * The bids for Harvard are to be opened the latter part of June, the Council award anticipated for June 28th, but there is a rather large window as to when construction can commence, that because it is hoped the water table will recede somewhat, which is towards the end of summer, the material used will be rubberized asphalt, this also to realize the best possible price; * Confirmed that the cul-de-sacs, parking lots, and streets throughout the City are in need of repair; the projects should be done in an orderly manner; * There is $33,500, the desire is to spend it on the cul-de-sacs; there also should be an additional $60,000 that was taken out of the budget; Banyon, Columbine, and Camelia are the worst; as to priority and cost, response was that it is not certain where they fall within the Master Plan, and the cost was not readily available; * Comment was made that the CIP budget is for Council to review for their respective districts, do a project, defer a project, delete a project, spend the monies on something else; if the desire is that the $33,500 be spent on cul-de-sacs then that should be the prerogative; * It was suggested that the three cul-de-sacs mentioned be looked at again for priority status as they are failing quickly; 6-7-99 As a policy question, it appears the Council is suggesting that general fund dollars be used for a street project, which has not been done in the past, general fund is never used for street improvements; it seems that it is being said that since this money would be coming from the general fund project it would be okay to put this before a higher priority project on the Pavement Management Plan; if taken to an extreme then any of the general fund projects could be opened up, the Pavement Plan then would only apply to those projects funded by gas tax or Measure M; * Again, the CIP is a plan that staff submits to the Council, in turn the Council agrees or does not agree and determines their specific priorities; in this case support was indicated for the request for CPE; that countered with the statement that the Council has however taken a position to follow the Pavement Management Plan; that comment then countered that the Council merely accepted the Plan; to that the response was that projects have been classified as to need, if projects are pulled out of order and not dealt with in an objective way, that could pose problems and uncertainties; * I * Mentioned again that the streets need to be reviewed periodically, those mentioned are failing fast; the response was that the plan was gone about scientifically and logically from an engineering and economic perspective, if the Council chooses to set that aside for another process that is fine, however it makes sense to try to progress in an orderly and logical manner with some engineering support; there are many bad streets in the community, 2nd Street an example, there comes a point where a street will fail and become very expensive to repair, those with higher traffic volumes will fail rather quickly, Harvard Lane a good example, if let go for another year it will require rebuilding the entire street at a cost five to six times more; the problem with the cul-de-sacs is understood, but the reality is that traffic volumes are not high on those streets and the condition of those streets today will likely be the same condition next year; Columbine and Banyon and Camelia are thought to be fairly high on the priority; I * Request was that a time table be given to repair those streets as priority listed; response was that it can be looked at yet it depends on how much money is available; an infusion of money is anticipated from the Bixby project which may give opportunity to put more general fund dollars towards a paving program, accelerate the time table for doing the projects; this year the budget takes advantage of matching monies for arterials, which are very expensive to repair, by doing so that will deter big problems on the arterial system down line, which may allow more money to be put towards residential streets; I * There is more work than there is money; I I I 6-7-99 * It was anticipated that the $60,000 for Lampson would have been in the budget, the request again that it be put back, the $33,500 could be used too, put both into the cul-de-sacsl request was made for costs, that information has not been receivedl how far will that amount gOl * Reference was made to a prior statement that this would be taking the general fund dollars in the CIP and reprioritizing them as a policy decisionl to that a statement was made that the policy decision was in fact made by taking the monies from last year out of the budget without Council decision or direction: * Comment, if there is no interest in doing something with the Lampson median, then it would make sense, if the desire were to redirect those general fund dollars to residential streets, to look at which streets come out highest on the Pavement Management system list for College Park East: comment too that if the Council strays from an organized way of doing things it becomes chaos, instead of doing things in an efficient, cost effective way: yet there could be some logic to look at the priority list for CPE only: there was disagreement, suggesting that sometimes there needs to be some flexibility, particularly when things need to be fixed: this request was likened to the improvements to the intersection at 4th/Central where the residents of 5th Street then became upset because of the potential impact on them: the CPE repair request is high on the Pavement priority list: there is $33,500 in the budget that can be used: * In search for additional funds, reference to the Street Tree Program, account 49695, there has been zero dollars for years, now it is $25,000: suggestion to cut to $15,000, hold the other $10,000 for something else: mentioned that a local resident funded the planting of fifty-five trees on Ocean Avenue for $4,000: $250,000 of ReLeaf Program money is anticipated: * Suggested that the Engineering Department develop a cost estimate first: to that there appeared to be agreement: suggested then that the monies saved from the street tree program then be held: response was that it is believed there was $10,000 for trees in the current budget: Public Works and the Recreation Department have been working closely to repair sidewalks and replace trees, when monies are taken away there is just less work done: comment was that trees are a benefit to the City and quality of life: response was that the $250,000 grant will be for the Boulevard median and planting of parkway and median trees, the entire project is $600,000: there appeared to be consensus to not reduce the tree program monies: * City Hall office construction and lease of Old City Hall space: no action at this point: * Undergrounding of Overhead Telephone wires - Edison Park, $8,000: mentioned that the funding for that 6-7-99 * commenced with the adoption of the Main Street Specific Plan~ the Main Street program commenced with the pier bathrooms, then the off-Main Street parking lot and Main Street trees~ The next priority was to improve the beach parking lots~ it is understood that the lots are near failure~ there was question of an earlier statement that the beach lots could wait another year, their condition was not immediate concern~ yet said the beach is the City's signature, there are a lot of visitors, if that is a part of the upgrading of Main Street it needs to be kept functioning~ in response, if the beach lots are to be part of the Main Street improvements then the in-lieu fees collected should be used rather than general fund dollars~ acknowledged that the beach lots are bad, in fact have probably failed already, in need of a major overhaul, yet can probably go another season~ this year retain $35,000 for next year, use the other $30,000 for something else~ I * From a liability standpoint, mention was made of a lack of support for cobblestone crosswalks on Main Street~ there are already liabilities in the form of broken curbs, sidewalks, and lack of trees~ response was that there is money in the budget~ statement made too that there is no money set aside to fix the drainage problem at St. Anne's~ response was that there was originally $75,000 for a local drainage program, also money to fix the heating and air conditioning at Marina Center~ there were a number of things initially~ it is not known where another $60,000 to $80,000 can be found~ I * with regard to an $8,000 item for Main Street and Park trash receptacles, inquiry was if that hadn't already been spent~ response was that there were not enough receptacles to cover all of Main Street and the Park~ * There are only a couple of new projects in the CIP this year, there are some that have been deferred in the interest of balancing the budget~ staffing was deferred as well, there are a number of divisions that are very short from a personnel standpoint~ the intent is to hold tight until there is more sales tax revenue~ * Every year staff is going to want more money, that is what is expected because of the desire to offer more services and do more things, that is desirable, however the Council must have enough restraint and be frugal enough to say no and prioritize~ I * $20,000 for a digital aerial photo for the GIS system~ stated that those are restricted use monies, surcharges on building permits~ can not be touched~ * The CADD/GIS Program - question, is the $8,750 restricted funds~ this a program that the City is committed to if it is desired to computerize GIS, the equipment needs to be purchased, the initial I I I 6-7-99 steps have been taken; * Expected that the Pacific Coast Highway Bikeway monies of $110,000 will come from elsewhere, thus freeing that amount; * Council Chamber carpet and seating; possibly that can be done in increments rather than all in one year; * Prioritize some of the things that need to be done; some of the public facilities are in need; the 8th/Central Fire Station needs repair; * 405 Eastbound Ramp Entrance Improvements - question if that is not CalTrans, what is to be done; response, those are carryover monies to upgrade the freeway entrances, this is not yet designed, it is the westerly corner on Beverly Manor; * Suggested that the CIP be gone through project by project, give them a yes or no, if no then that money is placed in a reserve to be used at the time of public hearing should a priority need to be funded; * City Manager analysis of the discussions was that the Old City Hall lease of space could likely be done for $2,200 less, to $8,500; office supplies have been reduced to $7,500; $5,000 may be adequate for the 1st Street restrooms, the intent is to deal with the birds, the floor, and fixtures; it is believed that the tenant would do this at cost; reduced building maintenance, account 43500, from $31,000 to $25,000; attempt to seek outside funding for the yellow house; postponed the decision on Public Works Yard fuel tanks; * The list of Councilmember Boyd included $15,000 for Council Chamber refurbishment, deferred; $16,800 for office buildout and lease, deleted; $5,000 reduced from Building Maintenance, Fund 52; $5,000 from First Street restrooms; $1,600 deleted for SCAG dues; $1,000 added for LaFrance maintenance; $5,000 for beach parking lot improvements, that assuming that the beach lot resurfacing is left in, again requesting that it be deferred to another year, take $30,000 for something else with $35,000 reserved; * Question, if beach lot delayed for another year, how much more critical will it be; response was that it may already be too late, the amount shown was for an overlay, that may work but additional prep work may be needed; if the lot fails completely it could be as much as $150,000; to questions, responses were the project would likely start in the fall, if wait for a year it would depend on the amount of rainfall, possibly significant failure; the recommendation was again to hold $35,000 in reserve, use $30,000 for something else; St. Anne's needs to be funded too; * Storm Drain Master Plan - that was started last year with $100,000, the recommendation is another 6-7-99 $100,000; the Council could program that money for actual work; * Noted that most items are one time expenses, a full time employee is an on-going cost; it is agreed that the deputy position would be the optimal situation, yet the desire is to hang on until it is known there will be on-going income to support that and funding of reserves; the only staffing increases has been in the Police Department, that to either decrease overtime costs or positions that pay for themselves; part-time is half the cost; additional part-time is included; desire was indicated to include at least a part-time deputy City Clerk; response was that the preference would be to be without rather than expect a part-time person to be able to step into that job; there are forty-four part time hours in the four day work week; mention was made that semi-automated phone system is in place, the Clerk's office answers the phone where the phone could technically not be answered, someone answering the telephone is preferred, it is believed there would be a number of service complaints if it were fully automated; I * It was mentioned that the remainder of the budget is basically set, those are funds that can not be touched, enterprise funds, cooperative funding projects; it is felt the budget should now go to the Council, policy decisions may be made at that time with regard to priority projects, the Pavement Management priorities, 8th Street beach parking lot, deputy clerk position, utility users tax; question was posed if the part-time personnel in the Clerk's office could staff the office from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. rather than 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. in the interest of cost savings; .the response was that the telephones are very busy commencing at 7:00 a.m.; mentioned that AB 60 has passed all stages thus far, will mandate that any hours over eight hours per day will be paid oyertime,. thus a mandatory 8:00 to 5:00 workday with no exemptions. I PUBLIC COMMENTS Mayor Yost declared the Public Comment segment to be open. Mr. Joe Ribal, Seal Way, inquired about the absence of any reserve for possible future beach replenishment. He noted that the budget did not provide information relating to funds spent this past year relating to the replenishment, and requested that there be a final accounting of what that project did actually cost, the City and other participating agencies. Mr. Ribal expressed concern relating to moving ahead with undergrounding of utilities in the parking lots, explaining that about a year ago the Seal Way residents made I contact with Southern California Edison who in turn made a proposal for undergrounding the Seal Way utilities, the estimate was about $360,000 for the sixty-five lots, at that time the desirability of undergrounding the utilities in the parking lots was also indicated. He mentioned that if the intent is to improve the quality and atmosphere of Seal Beach other areas of the community should be involved in that type of improvement. Mr. Ribal noted that Seal Way is the narrowest alley in the City, transformers buzz, there is a high level of corrosion, and advised that on Seal Way there is some interest in that type of improvement, similar to that 6-7-99 I 6-14-99 I in Surfside, yet if the under grounding project of the beach lots is to be included, the suggestion of the Edison Company should possibly be kept in mind in terms of hold off for now. Mr. Ribal mentioned that there is always considerable discussion in District One with regarding to whose alley has been done, whose street is worse, and it may be worthwhile to create some community interest to have the utilities undergrounded so that the alleys are not concreted and then dug up to place cables, etc., possibly have a community study to work up a priority system. He again urged a final accounting of the sand replenishment project, consideration for future reserves, as there may be problems still forthcoming. Mr. Ribal said he believes that the community has a great deal of respect for the energy, time, expertise, and good nature of the Council, noting that the last time he attended a budget workshop was about eight to ten years ago where each district was doing battle for what was thought to be what their residents needed. Councilman Snow read a memorandum from the City Manager to the Mayor, Council, and Department Heads offering congratulations to Elizabeth Stoddard, Finance Officer, and her Department, upon receiving an award for outstanding financial reporting for the second year. There being no further input, Mayor Yost declared Public Comments closed. ADJOURNMENT By unanimous consent, the meeting was adjourned at 11:50 p.m. I ~ Approved: Attest: Seal Beach, California June 14, 1999 I The City Council of the City of Seal Beach met in regular session at 7:00 p.m. with Mayor Yost calling the meeting to order. The Girl Scout recipients of the Gold and Silver Awards were present and led the Salute to the Flag. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Yost Councilmembers Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow Absent: None