Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Min 1999-08-09 7-26-99 / 8-9-99 reported that the Council had discussed the items identified on the agenda and that no action was taken. RESOLUTION NUMBER 4720 - COMPENSATION / BENEFITS - MANAGEMENT / MID-MANAGEMENT Resolution Number 4720 was presented to Council entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH I ESTABLISHING WAGES AND BENEFITS FOR MANAGEMENT AND MID- MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES AND REPEALING ON THE EFFECTIVE DATES SPECIFIED ALL RESOLUTIONS IN CONFLICT THEREWITH." By unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution Number 4720 was waived. Boyd moved, second by Doane, to adopt Resolution Number 4720 as presented. AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried RESOLUTION NUMBER 4721 - COMPENSATION / BENEFITS - POLICE CAPTAINS Resolution Number 4721 was presented to Council entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH ESTABLISHING WAGES AND BENEFITS FOR POLICE CAPTAIN EMPLOYEES AND REPEALING ON THE EFFECTIVE DATED SPECIFIED, ALL RESOLUTIONS IN CONFLICT THEREWITH." By unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution Number 4721 was waived. Boyd moved, second by Yost, to adopt Resolution Number 4721 as presented. AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried I ADJOURNMENT It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to adjourn the meeting at 12:13 a.m. Approved: Attest: Seal Beach, California August 9, 1999 I The City Council of the City of Seal session at 7:01 p.m. with Mayor Yost order with the Salute to the Flag. Beach met in regular calling the meeting to 8-9-99 ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Yost Councilmembers Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow Absent: None I Also present: Mr. Till, City Manager Mr. Barrow, City Attorney Mr. Whittenberg, Director of Development Services Mr. Badum, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Ms. Stoddard, Director of Administrative Services Ms. Beard, Director of Recreation and Parks Captain Maiten, Police Department Captain Cushman, Lifeguard Department Ms. Yeo, City Clerk PRESENTATIONS I SEAL BEACH HOST LIONS CLUB - WHEELCHAIR DONATION Mr. Dave Hubbard, President of the Seal Beach Host Lions Club, said he was present to officially dedicate the all- terrain wheelchair to the Seal Beach Parks and Recreation Department. He noted that the chair has been in use since the Fish Fry in mid July, most recently used at Childrens Day at the Marine Stadium in Long Beach, the hope is that it will be of benefit to children in Seal Beach. Mayor Yost mentioned his attendance at the Childrens event on two occasions, sponsored by the Long Beach Ski and Boat Club to benefit children from Miller Childrens Hospital and Childrens Hospital of Orange County, which he described as a great event. Councilman Doane said not only was he pleased to see the donation of the wheel chair but also to see presence of the Seal Beach Lions behind the grill cooking their hamburgers and hotdogs for the entire Childrens Day just because they believe in the event. Appreciation was expressed to the Lions Club. I ORANGE COUNTY TRANSIT AUTHORITY - CENTERLINE RAIL PROJECT Mr. Steve Schibuola introduced himself as the Senior Associate of the IBI Group, the lead consultants for the Centerline project, and expressed appreciation for being allowed to make this presentation. Mr. Schibuola offered that rapid transit/rail service has been an item of discussion and planning since OCTD bus service was established in 1970, the current round of activity stems from the 1990 passage of the Measure M half cent.sales tax, meant for transportation improvements throughout the County, initially a substantial amount of that money was earmarked for freeway improvements, the second half of Measure M, from now through 2007, is planned for a rapid transit system which is called the Centerline project. Mr. Schibuola made reference back to the Transportation Plan 2020, the objective there was to increase transportation capacity in ways that foster community vitality yet minimizes environmental impacts and maximize the public investment in the transportation system, as freeway expansion is becoming very costly from a monetary and environmental standpoint therefore alternatives need to be looked at to maintain mobility. Mr. Schibuola presented visual information as well, explaining that the vision of 2020 is the horizon for this system, the County will be adding 575,000 residents and even more new jobs. He 8-9-99 mentioned that Measure M monies are being used for a number of improvements, the freeway, the HOV network, bus service is being expanded by fifty percent, toll roads will be completed, Metrolink is adding about a thousand seats, primarily from the Inland Empire, and bike lanes will be expanded, despite all of those improvements 2020 anticipates an additional two thousand daily trips on Orange County roads, increases in time delays, and reduction of speeds from the levels of today. He noted that light rail was introduced as an alternative means to move around, this from experiences of other systems such as Sacramento, portland, and San Diego, cities that have introduced light rail systems within the last twenty years where it has been found that in addition to transportation improvements there has been a beneficial impact on real estate values, employment, and lifestyle in the form of a new choice of travel and environmental benefits. Mr. Schibuola said once Measure M was approved, OCTA then went through a master plan of rail transit which identified an eighty-seven mile system in addition to the central corridor, one stretch would come up the 405 Freeway near the Seal Beach area and possibly connect with the Blue Line in Long Beach, this is good as a master plan but a determination needs to be made as to the first section to be funded. To a question of Council, Mr. Schibuola described an area shown on a map as the old Pacific Electric right- of- way, whereas the County purchased the right-of-way from Santa Ana up to the County boarder at Buena Park, Garden Grove as an example purchased some of that land, some parts are merely paved over for parking as they can not build permanent structures, only for temporary uses, yet the right-of-way is in tact and available to be converted to a rail system in the future. After defining the master plan OCTA then needed to determine the starter segment, basically the heart of the corridor was selected, running from Fullerton through Anaheim, into Orange and the government complex in Santa Ana, to South Coast Plaza in Costa Mesa, then southeast paralleling the 405 through the business center in Irvine, ending at the Irvine Transportation Center, this corridor contains most of the County's major activity centers, John wayne Airport, Disneyland, by 2015 about a third of the County population will live within a couple of miles from this corridor and more than half of the employment will be located there. He pointed out again that this would be a twenty-eight mile system from Fullerton to Irvine, about twenty-four to twenty-eight stations, trips from two to ten miles long seem to be the most attractive, also it has been found to be a good alternative for people traveling the MetroLink from the Inland Empire and transferring to this system rather than experiencing the crowding, ridership is anticipated at about thirty-five thousand per day initially, sixty-five thousand in about 2020. Mr. Schiboula mentioned that the rail system can not live on its own, needs to be supported by several other modes, in addition to walking or biking to the corridor, park and ride lots would be provided at the stations closest to the freeways, the expanded bus network will be rerouted nearer the corridors, it is envisioned that certain major employers might provide shuttles for their employees, and MetroLink connections will be important. At the present this is going through both the State and federal environmental process, a joint environmental impact report is being prepared, is presently in the hands of the federal government awaiting a signature, it is anticipated that the document will be released for public review during the first week of September. There are three alternatives, all of which basically serve the same I I I 8-9-99 I areas of the County but in different ways, one is the completely elevated system, the most comparable is in Vancouver, Canada, operates above the traffic therefore does not experience delays, a wonderful system from a riders point of view however it is expensive to build and does pose visual impacts, especially in the older portions of the County, there are also a couple of at-grade alternatives, those would operate in the center of city streets. He explained that all systems would commence at the Fullerton Transportation Center, travel south on Harbor or Lemon to Anaheim, serving downtown Anaheim and the Disneyland area, also serve Edison Field and the Pond, then travel on State College Boulevard and The City Drive serving UCI Hospital and The Block in Orange, then on LaVeta to Main serving Childrens Hospital of Orange County and Main Place, at that point there are alternatives to either cross through the Civic Center area, the site of the new federal courthouse as well, then travel Bristol to South Coast or the system could remain on Main Street to serve the South Coast Mall and the Arts area, one alternative crosses the 405 with a Station at John wayne Airport then continues to UC Irvine, the other alternatives continue on Main Street to the business complex, one then goes up Jamboree to serve the more residential areas of Irvine while the other runs along the 405, the Edison corridor, both come to the Spectrum and end at the Irvine Transportation Center. The alternatives are basically equal in length, the UCI route a little shorter, this is a basic light rail transit technology which is somewhat of a modern version of the Red Car era, a little bigger, faster, yet the same concept, and can run either elevated or at grade, a purely elevated alternative opens a couple of options, which is possible if there is no altercations with traffic, a totally automated system is more efficient, or there are monorail options as well that are not unlike the Disneyland system, the technology of the system remains open at this point as are the alternatives. As to cost, the elevated system is projected at just under $2 billion, $6 or $7 million per mile, the street level systems would be about $1.2 to $1.3 billion, the ridership is relatively equal although the elevated system is somewhat faster. Suggestion was made that the cost per rider be included, to which Mr. Schiboula said that is one of the key indicators of cost effectiveness of the Federal Transit Administration as they would be responsible for partially funding this project, and responded that if all costs are considered, including capital, the cost of the elevated system would be about $20 per ride, the street systems would be about $12 to $14 per ride. With regard to funding strategies, Measure M earmarked a good portion of money for such a system, about $340,000,000 in 1988 dollars, now about $400,000,000 given the increase of its base which is sales tax, that can be used to build the system or some money can be held back to set up an endowment fund to help maintain it, federal grants are also a significant source of monies, some State and local sources as well. Mr. Schiboula mentioned again that the DEIR report is anticipated to be released the first week of September, subject to a forty-five day public comment period with field hearings held in each of the cities to go over the main points of the document with a final hearing at the OCTA, a charge of the Board is to present a single preferred line by November 8th at which time there will be further instruction to present that to the corridor cities, in December the Board can then decide whether to go forward with the project, what the alignment would be, at this point there is still considerable project design and environmental work to be I I 8-9-99 done, the construction itself, the earliest date anticipated for opening of the first segment is thought to be 2007. Mention was made that considerable development has been removed from the east side of Bristol, inquiring if that is in anticipation of this project. Mr. Schiboula explained that one of the key principals that OCTA set for the development of alternatives was to minimize property takes, the idea of light rail is that it is supposed to help the existing land use, not remove and replace it, however the at- grade alternative does use up lanes of traffic on some busy streets, they are working with the cities to develop a mitigation plan to ease traffic at certain key intersections and where there may be a requirement for some property, but there is no interest in taking out whole buildings to construct such a system. It was mentioned that the elevated portion of the light rail system in Portland follows the center line of the freeways, and asked if that has been given consideration. The response of Mr. Schiboula was that it has, particularly for the 405 corridor, pointing out however that if asked today if they would do that again, Portland would likely say no, the ridership of a system depends heavily on walk-in access and it is difficult to build a station in the middle of a freeway, integrated with surrounding development, but there is some economy to include such line if the freeway is being built or widened. To a question of distribution of information, Mr. Schiboula confirmed that OCTA is doing so and offered to request that copies be forwarded to the City. A request was made of Mr. Schiboula that the City of Seal Beach be provided with a copy of the Draft EIR document when available. I RESOLUTION NUMBER 4676 - HONORING MYLDRED JONES Councilmember Campbell reported that a celebration was held the prior week in recognition of the 90th birthday of Myldred Jones, founder of the Casa Youth Shelter and dedicated citizen of the nation and community, there were numerous recognitions and honors were presented to her during the recognition. I Councilmember Campbell read in full resolution Number 4676 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA, HONORING AND PAYING TRIBUTE TO MYLDRED JONES, AN EXCEPTIONAL INDIVIDUAL." Boyd moved, second by Campbell, to adopt Resolution Number 4676 as presented. AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried COUNCIL ITEMS CITY HALL PHOTOGRAPH Councilman Boyd displayed a photograph of the Seal Beach Pier and ocean waters taken by Mr. John Dankha, framed by J. Moore I Frames, on loan to the City for display in the hall of City Hall. FINANCE AWARD Mayor Yost announced that the City's chief financial officer, Elizabeth Stoddard, was the recent recipient of a National award, a Certificate of Excellence and Achievement in Financial Reporting. The City Manager presented the award to Ms. Stoddard, citing this as an important award that represents a comprehensive annual financial report from both a statistical and trend standpoint, the document gives a more 8-9-99 I precise view of the financial state of the City at the present time and for a period of years. Ms. Stoddard expressed appreciation to the National Association of Financial Officers for the recognition, also, a special thanks to her staff that should be part of this recognition. Councilmember Campbell noted the recent local news article in recognition of the Financial Award to Ms. Stoddard, the Award the highest form of recognition in the area of governmental accounting and financial reporting and represents significant attainment by its government and management, and commended Ms. Stoddard for her leadership. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mayor Yost noted a request to move item "K", the Business License Software Conversion Agreement, to the Consent Calendar, Councilmember Campbell requested that Item "H" be removed for separate consideration, that Item "J" be removed from the agenda and placed on the next Redevelopment Agency agenda, and a member of the audience requested that Item "F" be removed from the Consent Calendar. I In response to a question posed by Mayor Yost relating to Item "F", the waiver of full reading, Ms. Sue Corbin claimed the wording has been changed, that the public needs to know what the resolutions relate to, stating she wants full reading until such time as the agendas are in the hands of the newspapers in a timely manner, and suggested that the posted agenda at City Hall be displayed for the public in a locked glass container. Council consented to remove Item "F" and consider same separately. Boyd moved, second by Yost, to approve the order of the agenda as revised. AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried I PUBLIC COMMENTS Mr. Reg Clewley, Catalina Avenue, said other communities permit members of the public to address any item as it appears on the agenda, claimed he is not being allowed to address all of the items on the agenda under the time allowed, this evening he wishes to speak to Items "0, M, P, N, and Closed Session. With regard to Item "N", the continued public hearing for the appeal of the Planning Commission denial of Minor Plan Review 99-5, Mr. Clewley said there are people present to speak to the item, he wanted the item heard and denied at this meeting. With regard to Item "P", conference with legal counsel with regard to existing litigation, said this needs to be dealt with in open session with a public hearing so that the public can have input into changing the approved ten thousand square feet of green habitat into concrete. To Item "M", the agreement relating to the Krenwinkle House, Mr. Clewley asked who has been paying the lost tax revenues since the property was deeded to the City some four years ago, how much has this cost the City, this structure proposed to be placed on the State Lands property which he claimed is better suited for wildlife habitat, asked if the building and zoning codes would be applicable to a business at 310 - 7th Street, and does the house fit on that lot. With regard to Item "0", an appointment to the Archaeological Committee, Mr. Clewley asked if this person will hide an archaeological site behind 1733 Crestview Avenue where he understands remains have been found in the general proximity of where the certain deck 8-9-99 footings were placed. Mr. Larry Moore, said he was present on behalf of Rob Driscoll and read a communication from Mr. Driscoll relating to the use of the ocean waters for aquatic sports, his feeling that both the surfers and windsurfers have expressed their points of view adequately and the council has sufficient information to render a fair and equitable agreement on the access issue in the San Gabriel River, it is trusted that a plan will be worked out whereby the River can be surfed when conditions dictate and windsurfed when the River is not suitable for surfing. An attachment to the communication from Mr. Driscoll was a letter written to Captain Cushman some two and a half years ago, said to show that this issue is not new, will not go away without fair resolution, and in response to an accusation implying that the black ball policy was instigated by the Mayor. The communication stated further that he and others have been working on this issue with Captain Cushman for several years, in fact it was the Captain that implemented the black ball policy. The communication of Mr. Driscoll objected to the unfounded accusations against the character of the Mayor, expressed acceptance of the opposing opinions of members of the Council on this issue as an example of what democracy is all about. Mr. Moore also submitted a petition of about two hundred signatures obtained this past weekend in support of the position of the windsurfers, the addresses of the signors from Northern and Southern California, Colorado, Hawaii, Aruba, and Argentina, this not just a local issue for Seal Beach surfers, rather a truly worldwide issue of minority rights and fair access for all beach user groups. Mr. Michael OVerang, practicing attorney in the San Fernando Valley and teacher at University of Southern California, said he was present at the invitation of the windsurfer community with regard to some of their concerns. Mr. overang stated that the issue is with beach access, under the California Constitution access is guaranteed to the navigable waters of the State and shall always be attainable to the people thereof, concern is whether or not that access is going to be continued. He noted that the State passed the Coastal Law Act which states that in carrying out the Constitutional mandate of guaranteeing access, maximum access and recreational opportunities shall be provided to all of the people consistent with public safety needs and the need to protect public rights, rights of private property owners, and the natural resource areas from over use. Mr. OVerang stated his belief is that no one has a particular problem with that in general, the question is what can be done about it in a particular situation, access rights, when it is infringing on someone else, Section 4-8 makes it quite clear that regulations can be adopted, how they will be implemented was addressed by Resolution 3876 which provides to the lifeguards a substantial amount of discretion, which to his belief, is where some of the problem exists, in that the lifeguards are given authority to expand, prohibit, confine, or restrict boardsurfing under circumstances set forth, in other words the discretion has been turned over to the lifeguards to make decisions as to when, where, and how access occurs. Mr. OVerang said the question is if there is some way the Council can come to agreement or give direction to the lifeguards that is less arbitrary and discretionary, then, everyone would know what the rules are, would allow reasonable use for all people in order to meet the mandate of the State Constitution and the Waters Act. He said the windsurfers are proposing reasonable use for their community, one way would be a time period such as 3:00 to 6:00 p.m. daily, which gives I I I 8-9-99 I equal opportunity to the surfers, bathing community, as well as the windsurfers to have access to the Channel, it would take the discretion out of the lifeguard obligation, the time period when the windsurfers would be entitled to be in the Channel would be known. Mr. OVerang stated that the important thing is to get this matter on the agenda, this is not a new issue, it has resurfaced in the last two plus years, will not go away, the concern, from the standpoint of a citizen is what happens next year, next spring, will be same problem reappear, if so, what are the consequences, at this point can something be adopted that makes sense and gives reasonable use to another part of the Council constituency, the windsurfing community. Ms. Jenny Kohler said she was present to speak to the unfair denial by the lifeguards to a public resource and making a dangerous place for the windsurfers. She read a section of Resolution Number 3876 making reference to Municipal Code Section 4-8, relating to authority of the lifeguards. Ms. Kohler mentioned that in recent weeks there have been several days when the winds have exceeded fifteen miles an hour and there were no surfers in the River, on one day she telephoned the lifeguards requesting that they raise the flag that would allow windsurfer access to the River, the response was no, that they were following Resolution 3876, they then sent their boat to the sailing area to keep the windsurfers from using the River, they were asked to park the boat so that it would not drift into the sailing area, the response of the lifeguard was that he could not park the boat and had no control over where it went, to that Ms. Kohler stated this was unacceptable for a safety officer in that if the boat can not be controlled it should not be endangering surfers, windsurfers, swimmers, and others. She claimed that the lifeguards have become a threat to safety due to this dispute, they drive the boat into the sailors, cause them to fall into the water, direct the sailor to abandon his equipment and board the lifeguard boat only to be told to stay away from the River, and said if that were to happen to her she would not hesitate to sue the City. Ms. Kohler reported she spoke with the Lifeguard Chief after the last meeting regarding his comments, asked if the River could be sailed if there were no surfers in the River and the flag was not up, to that he responded that the River is a navigable waterway and as long as one did not sail within one hundred feet of a surfer or bather that would be alright, the following Sunday there were no surfers in the River, a request to use the River was denied again stating that Resolution 3876 was being enforced, she referred them to the authority of the lifeguards to use discretion, and to that was informed that a determination had been made to not allow windsurfers in the River until the dispute is resolved, yet about a half hour later access was allowed however no flag was raised therefore those who were sailing had no knowledge of the access. Ms. Kohler said there is no consistency by the lifeguards, there needs to be clear regulations, there is no reason to deny River access to the windsurfers when there are no surfers present and since it is deemed to be a navigable waterway it should then be a safety issue with the surfers as well, also, since it seems that the City has determined that windsurfing craft are vessels possibly they should have access before surfers, but that is not what the windsurfers want, this natural resource should be shared. Ms. Kohler mentioned again that there only request is to access the River under certain conditions, between 3:00 to 6:00 p.m. on days when the wind averages more than fifteen miles per hour, this needs to be resolved before someone is I I 8-9-99 hurt, and until that time possibly both surfers and windsurfers should be denied River access. Mr. Richard Blum mentioned that he has spoken before and has sent communications to the Council, and noted that on two occasions this week there were no surfers in the River when he was windsurfing yet access was denied, it is understood that there have been three days when there were good sailing conditions yet the resource was not being used, to him that is unacceptable, unfortunate, and will not be tolerated. Mr. Blum mentioned that they have legal counsel present, he too has practiced law for some twenty-one years, suggesting there should be a means to make something happen. Mr. Blum read his prepared letter, thanked the Council for the recent public forum, an opportunity for people to speak, this issue unique to Southern California and small beach town living, agreeing too that if this is the biggest problem of the City it must be doing quite well, as it is as a small beach community, he has personally enjoyed Seal Beach since early 1980's. Mr. Blum said since the forum of two weeks ago the windsurfers have even greater resolve to assure that they are afforded some access to this unique, public, limited resource, it is hoped that this period of time has allowed an opportunity for meaningful discussion, aside from the emotionalism of the forum much was learned of the needs of the surfers and windsurfers, it is expected that the Council will effectuate a meaningful resolution, without that the issue will only rise again with contentiousness and problems, they are prepared to present this matter from a legal perspective with common sense and fairness for a more equitable use of this unique public and limited resource, during recent sails no more than two to six surfers have been observed in the contested area while there were two to three times as many windsurfers in the vicinity, therefore the claim of the surfers of needing this resource is overstated. Mr. Blum said he looks forward to concluding this matter in a fair and equitable manner. If it is contended,.as was said by some, that the surfers were here first then they too would be banned because the swimmers were in fact here first, and if a sailboard is defined as a vessel and the River is navigable then the surfers would be a hazard in navigable waters and would be required to leave the River, it is hoped this can be resolved without that level of action or analysis. Ms. Sue Corbin, Seal Beach, noted the objection of the Mayor at a previous meeting to the comments of a speaker regarding residents of Leisure World, claimed this a violation of free speech, mentioned too that a person can speak under oath voluntarily but can not be required to do so, people need to be allowed equal speaking time, to exceed the five minutes requires a vote of the Council, to Councilman Doane she said people should not be criticized for their opinions, interrupted, nor should they be restricted from repeating a prior comment, also, legal counsel should be educating the Council as to free speech and the Constitution, requesting that the Council try harder to comply in the future. Ms. Corbin spoke of the recent court decision relating to the Bixby project and objected that that decision has not yet been disclosed, and with regard to the request of the windsurfers said it is greed and threatening. Ms. Fran Johnson, Coastline Drive, asked why animal services are being contracted with Long Beach rather than keeping the service local, the animal services in Seal Beach are known throughout the country, control of such services should be kept local. She noted that the City ran fine when there was no money, now that there is some money it is being given away, emphasizing her preference to keep animal control and the money in Seal I I I 8-9-99 I Beach. Mr. Frank Boychuck, Trailer Park, spoke favorably of his experiences with the sky rail in Vancouver, and in reference to the earlier presentation said such a facility would be good for Seal Beach. Mr. Boychuck extended an invitation to the people of Seal Beach to attend a gathering at the Trailer Park on August 28th. There being no further comments, Mayor Yost declared Public Comments closed. APPOINTMENT - ARCHAEOLOGICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE Mayor Yost requested that the District Three appointment be held over. I RESOLUTION NUMBER 4724 - SUPPORTING SANTA ANA WATERSHED PROJECT - UNDERGROUND WATER STORAGE Resolution Number 4724 was presented to Council entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH SUPPORTING SANTA ANA WATERSHED PROJECT AUTHORITY PROGRAM FOR UNDERGROUND WATER STORAGE." By unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution Number 4724 was waived. Councilmember Boyd mentioned that Supervisor Spitzer requested that this item be brought before the Council, this part of the Orange County Water District and Sanitation District proposal to recycle treated waste water which in turn will increase the water supply so that the region will be more self-sufficient during droughts, improve the quality and safety of the water supply, restore habitat for native species, provide for flood control and create new wetlands and open space in the region. He explained that if the agencies in the County support this there will be a water bond on the 2000 ballot, that bond will benefit the region in terms of tax dollars. He noted that there was a news article this date relating to water and the use of water, Seal Beach one city that imports very little, at 18.2 square miles the City is one of the largest geographically in the County, Seal Beach imported about thirteen percent, the average is about forty-eight percent, that results in higher water costs, therefore it is of benefit that the City has its own ground water well system. Mayor Yost said he is not totally comfortable with this concept, arrangement has been made for the Orange County Water District and Sanitation District to make an informational presentation at the next meeting, his preference would be to hold this item over until that presentation is made. Councilman Boyd noted that this is not a request to support the GWR program which is highly treated waste water that is then pumped into the ocean, instead, this water would be pumped into a holding basin to percolate into the ground over a period of five to ten years, goes into the aquifer where it is pumped as well water, treated, and processed for drinking, this resolution is actually in support of the bond measure. Mayor Yost again expressed his preference to postpone this pending further information. Councilman Snow said he too had a letter from Supervisor Spitzer from which he read that 'SAWPA, the Santa Ana Water Project Authority, is a joint powers agency representing five major water districts covering portions of Orange, Los Angeles, San Bernardino, and Riverside counties, the service region home to more than 4.8 million people, and is charged with assuring supplies of good quality water in Southern California while at the same time enhancing the environment.' Councilman Snow suggested that all read the news article previously referenced, what is being proposed for wastewater is very important as to years 2010 and 2020, the methods used before pumping water into the underground aquifers is a micro-filtration system as well as reverse osmosis, and there are methods coming into existence regarding the purification I 8-9-99 of water. He mentioned a recent tour of facilities from Seven Oaks Dam to the ocean, many operations are being performed to purify the water before it goes back into the aquifer. Councilman Doane recalled previous information that areas like Mile Square Park were being served by reclaimed water, at that time question was posed as to why Seal Beach did not do the same with the Bixby and Leisure World golf courses as an example, to that it was explained that the pipes were not available, are they now. Response was that everything being treated today goes to the ocean, about two hundred fifty million gallons a day through the Sanitation District, pumped through two outfalls, one near Newport Beach, some goes into the Santa Ana River, this is highly treated water, the idea is to send it back up the River to percolate into the holding basin and the aquifer, a process that will take about four years to reach the point where it would be considered for extraction. In response to the question of getting reclaimed water now, Councilman Boyd indicated he was not certain, that would be somewhat suspect at this time. Councilman Doane said he was surprised to not have seen an expansion of the use of reclaimed water. There was general consensus to hold this item over until the next meeting for the presentation by the Water and Sanitation Districts. I CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEMS "F" thru "I"and "K" Boyd moved, second by Yost, to approve the recommended action for items on the agenda as presented, except Items "F and H", removed for separate consideration. G. Approved regular demands numbered 024438 through 024584 in the amount of $729,610.83, payroll demands numbered 4410 through 4601 in the amount of $170,227.40, and authorized warrants to be drawn on the Treasury for same. I I. Adopted Resolution Number 4725 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH ESTABLISHING WAGES AND BENEFITS FOR CONFIDENTIAL, SUPERVISORY, PROFESSIONAL AND TECHNICAL EMPLOYEES AND REPEALING ON THE EFFECTIVE DATES SPECIFIED ALL RESOLUTIONS IN CONFLICT THEREWITH." By unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution Number 4725 was waived. K. Approved the Agreement with Hdl Software, LLC for conversion of the Business License System database and authorized staff to execute said Agreement on behalf of the City. AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried I ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM "F" - WAIVER OF FULL READING Boyd moved, second by Doane, to approve the waiver of reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions and that consent to the waiver of reading shall be deemed to be given by all Councilmembers after the reading of the title unless specific request is made at that time for the reading of such ordinance or resolution. 8-9-99 AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried I ITEM "H" - COUNCIL MINUTES Councilmember Campbell noted an error relating to the vote on Resolution Number 4720, clarifying that she had not voted for its approval. The City Clerk stated that the error would be corrected. Boyd moved, second by Yost, to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of July 28th as corrected. AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried I ANIMAL CONTROL BACKUP/EMERGENCY/LICENSING SERVICES Captain Maiten stated that this item reflects the decision to change the staffing of the Animal Control Bureau from two to one and a half persons. He offered that a major problem is finding a part time employee, primarily due to the lack of fringe benefits and the compensation is not that high, as an example South County has been looking for part time employees for about a year, the recent City recruitment had only three applicants, two had no experience the other is a health technician with a veterinary hospital, and if a part time employee were hired that would require psychological and medical examinations, background investigation, then there would be training in the animal control function, and 832 Police Academy training which allows the person to issuance citations, also pointed out that even with a two person Animal Control operation backup by Orange County Animal Control was necessary as it is not possible to staff around the clock with just two people. The Captain mentioned that a major problem focused when the Mayor and a member of the Council looked at Orange County as a major backup whereupon it was found that they were actually refusing to bring any animal found in the City to the Seal Beach shelter, rather, they take the animal to their facility for a full six days, that was a problem with the organization of the Friends of the Animal Care Center. He said in an attempt to resolve that problem contact was made with Long Beach Animal Control who indicated they would be willing to place Seal Beach animals in the local shelter as they would have a concern with overcrowding their shelter facility. While discussing contract provisions, given the fact that Long Beach had not negotiated a contract previously that did not use their shelter, a potential cost figure of $25,000 per year was tentatively agreed upon, that for backup services only during local non-staffed hours, when the City's Animal Control Officer is on duty she would perform that function, at this point there is a draft contract that is awaiting finalization. The Captain said problems with animal licensing had also been discussed, a time and person intensive function, the revenue from that has been about $8,000 to $11,000 per year, the City of Long Beach has offered to do the licensing, the first year cost to set up computers and programs would be about $7,000, any fees over that would be split fifty-fifty, with proper canvassing and follow-up $20,000 in revenues could be anticipated in following years where after basic costs would be split on the fifty-fifty basis, a canvass to take place about every two years. He mentioned that the City could however go back to Orange County, that has been a good contract until now, their costing has changed to a per service basis on each action of $10 per service, thus it is not possible to even work up an estimate of cost, Long Beach would be $78.50 per call if not on contract, another factor is that Orange County is going to I 8-9-99 a new shelter at the Tustin Air Base, the best guess cost of over a year ago to be part of that service was well above $100,000 payable over seven years and it is likely that number has increased, and even as of this afternoon a firm figure could not be obtained from Orange County Animal Control. The Captain requested authorization to formalize a contract with Long Beach Animal Control for round the clock backup service seven days a week and for animal licensing. Councilman Boyd inquired as to the increase or decrease in the level of service to the residents, the Captain responded that he did not feel it would be a decrease yet he would like to give it a trial for six months, a problem is that when an Animal Control Officer is off duty they respond from home, that is about the same as the backup response from Long Beach. Councilman Boyd sought clarification that this is not contracting for animal control services rather a backup thereto, to which the Captain said his understanding is that the present Animal Control Officer will continue in that capacity. Councilman Boyd noted that it appears the intent is for backup only, such contract would satisfy the goal of keeping local animals in Seal Beach. Ms. Fran Johnson, Coastline Drive, inquired as to why the second Officer could not have been kept, there were no problems, there is $1 million from Bixby so why is it that Animal Services can not be kept in Seal Beach. Mayor Yost asked if animal licensing will be done in Seal Beach, the response of the Captain was that it is hoped it can be done by mail or they will continue to be sold from the Police Department, if a license is needed on a day when the regular ACO is off Long Beach has indicated they will make a trip to the residence, also, when Long Beach completes patrols of their parks and Belmont Shore area they will make a swing by the beach and parks in Seal Beach. Councilmember Campbell explained to the public that the $1 million from Bixby is designated for the tennis club site only. Councilmember Campbell expressed concern with this issue, said this is slowly chipping away the City's animal control, the goal is that since the prior Officer could not survive on half salary now the idea is to delete the part time position, the City needs to do medical and background checks on anyone hired as well as train them, the primary concern is that once control is lost it will never be regained, a few dollars may be saved now but in the future it will cost more, it can not be said that Long Beach will have the same compassion, the service will now go across county lines, when one goes outside the county there is no accountability. She expressed her opinion that this is cutting services that the residents rely on, that the Animal Control Officer is always on call, now Long Beach Animal Control will be on call, that is a mistake, the goal with this issue is to eliminate the local animal control, it was tried last year, now again, if it is Animal Control what is next, to this she emphasized disagreement, and doubted that money will be saved. Councilman Boyd explained that Animal Control is a Police function and totally separate from the Friends of the Animal Shelter, the City supports the Shelter financially to offset veterinary costs but the goal is still to keep local animals in the City, this does this, if the City still had two full time Animal Control Officers, asked i~ the City would still be seeking backup services, the response was that it would be Orange County at this point, also there is presently an unwritten agreement on a no charge, weekly basis with Long Beach as requested by the Friends so that no animals will leave Seal Beach, on their policy Orange County will not bend. The Captain mentioned that he has supported the Animal Shelter since it began, I I I 8-9-99 I there is nothing proposed with Long Beach that will impact the Friends of the Animal Care Center, they are completely separate from Animal Control although there is liaison with them, when staff started looking at contracts he attended a meeting of the Friends to seek ideas, this is an option, a contract, it can be broken. He said to recreate a police or fire department is cost prohibitive, to recreate an animal control agency is doable. With respect to emergencies or situations at night, Councilmember Campbell pointed out that a local backup exists and she wants to keep it that way, this is a personal service that the residents should have. Ms. Annette Robinson, Clipper Way, said she was unaware that this issue was on the Council agenda, and agreed that this service is a critical part of the quality of life in Seal Beach. She described her experiences with Animal Control, specifically an incident where their lost puppy was taken in yet there was not concern that it would inadvertently be taken to Long Beach, to have only one and a half animal control persons is beyond what is the community that people love and respect, if the issue is cost, there are other areas to look at, this should be looked at from a passionate and humane point of view rather than cutting people and the whole picture of what is the quality of life, this has brought a very positive public feeling for living here. Ms. Robinson asked that the Council rethink this entire issue and secure a full time animal control staff rather than cutting it and then bringing in an agency from outside for services, she too expressed concern with losing control. I Councilmember Campbell suggested that this item be held over for a couple of meetings whereby the public will then have an opportunity to present their views. Councilman Snow said consideration should be given to the amount of time spent on this issue by the Captain, no one having any greater concern for the quality of life in Seal Beach than he, therefore in his opinion the recommendation of the Captain should be supported. In response to a question of Councilman Boyd relating to staffing and backup services, the Captain stated that for the entire existence of the Animal Control Bureau the City has used Orange County as a backup, and again, if one is concerned with an animal leaving Seal Beach, if Orange County picks up the animal it will stay in the County for six days unless claimed by the owner, the County will not return the animal to Seal Beach during that period, after the six days it can be returned to the Animal Care Center, with Long Beach, if they find a stray or an injured animal in the City it would be placed with the Care Center, not leaving Seal Beach, in the case of a vicious animal it may be housed in Long Beach until the following morning, or their facility used in the event of an overcrowding situation. As to the contract term, Captain Maiten said he believed it will be on a one year basis with a thirty to sixty day termination clause. I Mayor Yost agreed with a prior recommendation that this matter be brought back to the Council in about two meetings with some additional information from a financial standpoint, what would be required to employ a second officer, which he cited as a substantial expense, also, allow for public comments and input from the Animal Care Center. He noted that thus far, even without a valid contract, the services provided by Long Beach have worked fairly well, their trucks show a Seal Beach identification, etc. Councilmember Campbell said she believed there is no desire to contract with Orange County Animal Control, of concern is turning over 8-9-99 too much to Long Beach. Mention was made that the budget reflects one and a half Animal Control personnel, of consideration is not a full time person. Councilman Snow moved to authorize the City Manager to formalize and sign a contract with the City of Long Beach to provide Animal Control backup and licensing services as recommended. There was no second to the motion. I It was the consensus of the Council to consider this item in a month with additional financial data, and the impact of possibly another one-half Animal Control Officer position. Councilman Boyd suggested that any comments from the Friends of the Animal Care Center, the public, Council to staff, etc., be completed prior to that meeting and that the Council be prepared to make a decision on this issue at that time. AGREEMENT - KRENWINKLE HOUSE The City Attorney reported that Mr. Dave Bartlett approached the City with a proposal to transfer the ownership of the Krenwinkle house to a private party, that party would take the responsibility for all costs of relocation and bringing the house into Code compliance, the business points of such agreement set forth on page two of the staff report. The City Manager noted that any agreement would need to be contingent upon the other party being able to perform, that financially this would be feasible. Councilman Boyd provided some historical background of the Krenwinkle house, built at the turn of the century, the yellow house at 100 Central Avenue, during the Hellman project considerations the Luraschi family donated the house to the City, the intention was to move the house to the State Lands property to be used as an interpretative center yet retain the historical benefit to the City, the cost to move the dwelling would have been about $30,000 and about $150,000 to bring it up to building standards, at this point it does not appear that the house will be used for that purpose, his goal would be to see the house maintained but without use of taxpayer dollars, yet the house can not be left where it is much longer as the time extension granted by the Luraschi family is about to run out, if it is not moved it will cost about $10,000 to $15,000 to demolish. He spoke favorably of the idea to have the house relocated and renovated by a private party, the potential owner has also agreed to install a flag pole and a plaque identifying the history of the house, in conversation this date it was indicated the desire is to renovate the home to be used as a bed and breakfast facility, he was also asked to liaison with the Historical Society to assure its historical value. I Councilman Boyd moved to direct the City Attorney to prepare an agreement to transfer the ownership of the Krenwinkle House to the owner of 310 - 7th Street. Councilman Doane seconded the motion. I Councilmember Campbell questioned whether the City should give away this House, possibly the City should solicit bids as there may be others who would purchase the House, move it, and that there be a stipulation that the House is of historical significance. Noting that the intent of the City had been to donate the House to the Hellman project, Councilman Boyd inquired of Mr. Bartlett if there has been any other parties that have indicated an interest in the House. The response of Mr. Bartlett that the intent was to find a means to save the House, the Hellmans tried to 8-9-99 I accommodate that by finding a location on the State Lands property, it would be the obligation of the City to move it to that location, the Hellmans would be responsible for restoring a portion of it. He noted that with the unknown in response to litigation that mayor may not occur in the immediate, near, or long term future, the idea of trying to save the House seems to be of prime interest, typically when such Houses are moved, such as in Pasadena and the older areas of Los Angeles and that are on the National Historic Register, a grant of a dollar is made and then the house is moved, in this case there is no immediate urgency therefore it could be put to bid however it is doubtful if there is any other interest. Councilman Boyd pointed out that the interested party is actually saving the City $10,000 or more by paying for the demolition of the House. Councilmember Campbell noted however that it has been announced publicly that the House is being given away, therefore her feeling is that it should be put to bid for any other interested person. To a question of Councilman Boyd, the City Attorney offered that he was not aware of any legal public notification or bidding requirements for this type of property as opposed to the procedures for real or surplus property of the City. Question was posed if notification to accept bids for three days commencing tomorrow would be sufficient, to which the City Attorney responded that since there are no specific guidelines any time frame could be established. Preference was indicated for thirty days. Councilman Boyd said he was told by the interested party that he is not interested in bidding on the house, rather, this is a benefit to the City to keep the House in tact, refurbish it as a bed and breakfast that people can stay in, agreement with that was indicated in that it would be restored and remain in the public domain, a value to the City, suggesting that if put to bid it be for a period of no more than ten days. Councilman Boyd accepted the amendment to the motion to call for bids for a period of ten days from this date, if no bids are received the House would be transferred in fee title to the interested party. Mayor Yost seconded the amendment to the motion that was initially seconded by Councilman Doane. I AYES: NOES: Boyd, Doane, Snow, Yost Campbell Motion carried PUBLIC HEARING - APPEAL - DENIAL OF MINOR PLAN REVIEW 99-5 - COTTONWOOD LANE The item was continued to the August 23rd, 1999 regular meeting. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT There was no report presented. I CITY MANAGER REPORT The City Manager made reference to an advisory notice posted August 3rd for the ocean waters between the pier and westerly of tower one, this pursuant to a State law that became effective July 1st relative to weekly testing of the ocean waters for harmful materials, on that date the measurement was three thousand per one hundred milliliters, the standard being four hundred, the source was uncertain, could have resulted from something as minor as an animal floating by, too, the tests are likely not a hundred percent perfect, and the count was down the next day. He noted also that the City has State grant money to conduct its own studies, which are underway, a starting point to identify sources of pollution, 8-9-99 the Public Works staff is coordinating with the County to not duplicate efforts, the intent of this program is to improve the quality of the water over time. PUBLIC COMMENTS Mayor Yost declared Public Comments open. Ms. patricia Clark, resident of the Trailer Park, stated she wished to I commend the Seal Beach Police Department. Ms. Clark described the incident where the car of her daughter was broken into, brief case stolen, a similar incident involving another vehicle occurred shortly thereafter, that vehicle stopped by the Police which resulted in the stolen briefcase being found and returned. Ms. Clark expressed her appreciation. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilman Doane made reference to a recent article in the local press reporting that through public donations a dog was allowed to have a surgery for a hip replacement, the animal was featured on the Talk of the Town program last Thursday, and as of today it was learned that the dog has been adopted to a new home. Councilmember Campbell once again congratulated Ms. Stoddard, Director of Administrative Services/City Treasurer for her award from the Government Finance Officers Association. She inquired of the Director of Public Works when the section of sidewalk that was taken out adjacent to Almond Park will be replaced, the response was that a contract is being put together at this time, Public Works manpower is being reprioritized as a result of the contracting out of refuse collection for Main Street, and the Department is starting a small in-house concrete crew, I possibly the referenced sidewalk repair could fall under that program. Councilmember Campbell reported again that there is a College Park East resident that has offered to pay a portion of the cost to repair a raised curb and gutter in front of a neighbors house where water gets trapped. Council declared a five minute recess, reconvening at 9:24. The Public Works Director responded that there has been a preliminary investigation, the intent is to have some survey work done, a problem is that College Park East is so flat, also, departmental policy is to not fix just one area and push the problem to the next property, preference is to do whole blocks at a time. He said it is appreciated that the resident is willing to participate financially yet a bit more investigation is necessary. Councilmember Campbell noted that the gutters in the area are such that one can not actually determine why water is trapped or pooled, in this case there is a tree that raised the curb and gutter, the Public Works Director responded that the driveway appears to have sunken somewhat as well, there could be a number of factors. Councilmember Campbell commended staff for a letter written to the City of Long Beach as being very good. With regard to the slurry seal of Almond and Dogwood, there is a I situation where General Telephone will be there tomorrow to trench and slurry seal the next day, inquiring if that is on schedule or if there is some leeway in event of GTE having a problem. The Public Works Director confirmed that there is some flexibility yet every effort will be made to stay on schedule and minimize any problems, explaining that the crossing that GTE will be doing is adjacent to the newly paved section. Councilmember Campbell mentioned that Elder and Fir have problems, it appears that the asphalt is not sticking, rather, moving and shifting, the question, anticipated time frame for the next series of street repairs. 8-9-99 I The Public Works Director stated the current project is Harvard Lane, the next project on the list would be Stanford Lane and the cul-de-sacs, if there is some savings from the Harvard project those monies could be applied to additional repairs, or if expenditures are greater there may n~ed to be some cutbacks. Councilmember Campbell noted that the residents of Camelia, Banyon, and Columbine are inquiring when those streets are scheduled, to that the Director responded that they are currently under design, it is hoped that plans will be ready by September, if the project falls too close to the rainy season it will need to be put off until after winter, that the result of the water table in the area, it is preferable that the table recede as much as possible, to that Councilmember Campbell said it would be appreciated if the project could be done before the rainy season because if it is a rainy winter and given the fact that those streets have failed so badly, there will be nothing but mud and dirt. She asked the status of the Hellman project, to that Mayor Yost said he would respond, also that he has planned a town hall meeting for August 30th where representatives of Hellman will be present to discuss that issue. To Councilmember Campbell's inquiry as to the status of the Department of Water and Power property, the City Manager reported there is no change, there is no application or new information, DWP is marketing the property. Given the thought of raising revenue, Councilmember Campbell suggested that other vacant land in the City should be looked at for retail and commercial zoning. Councilman Boyd mentioned his website which is updated about the first week of each month, and announced his upcoming town hall meeting in the Council Chambers at 7:00 p.m. on August 31st. Mayor Yost announced the Thursday night volleybaYI group at the McGaugh School Gym, a nice group of people having reasonably good skill levels, and invited others to join, also the Surfing Contest to be held this coming weekend at Rivers End, a charity event to benefit the Seal Beach Lifeguards and Surf riders Foundation. He announced again his town hall meeting scheduled for August 30th, 7:00 p.m., at the Mary Wilson Library on the topic of the Hellman property, where that project stands given the adverse legal decision rendered in San Diego, options, there may be some potentially positive things for the City in terms of wetlands restoration for that property. I I CLOSED SESSION The City Attorney stated that in addition to the items identified on the agenda, a conference with the labor negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6, a conference with legal counsel relating to existing litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a), City of Los Alamitos el al versus City of Seal Beach, and personnel matters pursuant to Government Code Section 54957, there is need to add an item relating to the case of Brendel versus Johnson, a report relating to the court ruling as of this date, to do so requires that the Council make a finding that the matter came to attention after the posting of the agenda. Boyd moved, second by Yost, to add the matter of Brendel versus Johnson to the Closed Session agenda as advised by the City Attorney, in that it came to attention after the posting of the agenda. AYES; NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried 8-9-99 / 8-16-99 By unanimous consent, the Council adjourned to Closed Session at 9:32 p.m. and reconvened at 10:16 p.m. with Mayor Yost calling the meeting to order. The City Attorney reported that the Council received reports relating to the items identified on the agenda, including the Bixby and Brendel cases, no action was taken. He announced that oral argument on the Hellman archaeological lawsuit will take place the following week. I ADJOURNMENT By unanimous consent, the Council adjourned the meeting until Monday, August 16th at 7:00 p.m. It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to adjourn the meeting at 10:18 p.m. Approved: I Attest: Seal Beach, California August 16, 1999 The City Council of the City of Seal Beach met in regular adjourned session at 7:00 p.m. with Mayor Yost calling the meeting to order with the Salute to the Flag. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Yost Councilmembers Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow Absent: None Also present: Mr. Dorsey, Assistant to the City Manager Mr. Barrow, City Attorney Mr. Whittenberg, Director of Development Services Ms. Yeo, City Clerk Councilmember Campbell recalled the recent introduction of the Los Alamitos Girls Softball Team upon winning the State Championship, announced that they have now won the National Championship and will be recognized at the August 23rd meeting. She recognized as well the seventeen year old College Park East resident, Kevin Gustafson, who is making his solo cross-country flight, also, acknowledging the article in the sports section of the news this week profiling Jack Haley, and extended best wishes to him. I