Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Min 1999-10-25 10-11-99 I 10-25-99 I CLOSED SESSION The City Attorney announced that the Council would meet in Closed Session to discuss the items identified on the agenda, a conference with the City's real property negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8, a conference with legal counsel relating to anticipated litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b), and a conference with legal counsel relating to existing litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a). By unanimous consent, the Council adjourned to Closed Session at 9:55 p.m. and reconvened at 10:42 p.m. The City Attorney reported that the Council had discussed the items identified on the agenda, gave direction to the City Attorney and City Manager, no other action was taken. ADJOURNMENT It was the consensus of the Council to adjourn the meeting until Monday, October 25th at 6:00 p.m. to meet in Closed Session. It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to adjourn the meeting at 10:43 p.m. clerk Approved: If:o, I Attest: Seal Beach, California October 25, 1999 The City Council of the City of Seal Beach met in regular adjourned session at 6:12 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 Absent: Councilman Snow I Councilman Snow joined the Council in Closed Session at approximately 6:18 p.m. Also present: Mr. Till, City Manager Mr. Steele, Assistant City Attorney Ms. Yeo, City Clerk APPROVAL OF AGENDA The Assistant City Attorney requested that an item be added to the Closed Session for discussion, a conference with legal 10-25-99 counsel with regard to pending litigation, Hotchkiss versus City of Seal Beach, that based upon the need to take action as of today and the need to take immediate action prior to Friday. Doane moved, second by Boyd, to include the item for Closed Session as requested by the Assistant City Attorney and approve the order of the agenda as revised. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Yost None Snow Motion carried I CLOSED SESSION By unanimous consent, the Council adjourned to Closed Session at 6:14 p.m. for a conference with legal counsel relating to existing litigation, City of Los A1amitos et a1 versus City of Seal Beach, League for Coastal Protection versus Coastal Commission, and pending litigation, Hotchkiss versus City of Seal Beach. The Council reconvened at 6:48 p.m. with Mayor Yost calling the meeting to order. The Assistant City Attorney reported that the Council had met in Closed Session to discuss the items previously identified, gave direction to staff, and no reportable action was taken. ADJOURNMENT It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to adjourn the meeting at 6:49 p.m. it Clerk and the City of clerk I Approved: Attest: Seal Beach, California October 25, 1999 The City Council of the City of Seal Beach met in regular session at 7:04 p.m. with Mayor Yost calling the meeting to order with the Salute to the Flag. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Yost Counci1members Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow I Absent: None Also present: Mr. Till, City Manager Mr. Steele, Assistant City Attorney Mr. Whittenberg, Director of Development Services 10-25-99 I Mr. Badum, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Chief Sellers, Police Department Officer Paap, Police Department Ms. Beard, Director of Recreation and Parks Chief Cushman, Lifeguard Department Mr. Dorsey, Assistant to the City Manager Mr. Cummins, Assistant Planner Ms. King, Interim Finance Director Ms. Yeo, City Clerk WAIVER OF FULL READING By unanimous consent, the Council waived the 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 reading of the title unless specific request is made at that time for the reading of such ordinance or resolution. PRESENTATIONS I PROCLAMATION - RED RIBBON WEEK Mayor Yost read the proclamation in full declaring October 25th through October 31st as "Red Ribbon Week." Chief Sellers expressed appreciation for the recognition of Red Ribbon Week, and the support from the community, he noted that over two thousand five hundred red ribbons were cut by and made available to Boeing employees, Boeing joined in the assembly this date at McGaugh School as did the Captain of the Naval weapons Station, the personnel on the Base also wearing red ribbons, and the Chamber and Business Association decorated Main Street with red ribbons. All of this involvement helps promote the drug education and awareness program and promotes the effort to keep the community safe and healthy for the young people. Officer Paap mentioned that it was special to have various groups and adults present at the McGaugh assembly, in addition to himself, Officer Safety and canine, demonstrating their support to the youth. MADD AWARDS The MADD awards were held over pending arrival of the representative of that organization. RESOLUTION NUMBER 4758 - HONORING CAPTAIN FRED KALMICK - 1999 VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTER OF THE YEAR Councilman Boyd read Resolution Number 4758 in full entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL RECOGNIZING AND HONORING CAPTAIN FRED KALMICK, SEAL BEACH VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTER OF THE YEAR FOR 1999" and expressed pleasure to have the opportunity to present this recognition of his former fellow firefighter. Captain Kalmick said he was accepting the resolution on behalf of all of the local volunteers as they all put in the same effort. I ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT - GROUNDWATER REPLENISHMENT SYSTEM The Director of Public Works mentioned that representatives of the Orange County Water District, the agency responsible for protecting the groundwater basin, were present to describe some new, innovative ideas. The Manager added that this presentation is timely as there are two issues that members of the Council have been looking at, the salt water intrusion barriers that have been proposed for the Boeing property as well as the ground water replenishment system. 10-25-99 Mr. Ron Wildermuth expressed appreciation for the opportunity to present information relating to what he deemed to be a visionary project, the groundwater replenishment system, sponsored by the Orange County Water District and the Orange County Sanitation District. * Acre feet of water - an amount of water to cover a football field to the depth of one foot - three hundred twenty-six thousand gallons; * What is the groundwater replenishment system - it basically takes highly treated waste water from the County Sanitation District, runs it through new, high tech technologies, create near distilled water, and use it to augment the sea water intrusion barrier and the groundwater basin; I * Why is this project needed - imported water is needed to augment the Santa Ana River to fill the groundwater basins, in the future the sources of imported water, whether it is Northern California or Colorado will be cut back or at best stay the same, at the same time, by year 2020 there will be additional population in the western states, for Orange County that will be about a half-million people, if this is not done there will be shortages of water in Orange County; Another reason for this project is that in the future it is going to be very difficult to build large reservoirs and canals, the future of water in California and eventually around the world is going to be conservation, efficiency, groundwater storage instead of surface reservoirs, water reuse, also transfers from agricultural entities to urban entities, using and moving surplus water to places where there is less water; * I * The ground water replenishment system - starting with microfiltration - a low pressure membrane technology that came to the United States from Germany after World War II, used today to make soda pop, Eggbeater eggs, in the computer chip industry water is made pure enough that it does not short out computer chips, and in the pharmaceutical industry to sterilize medicines that they can not heat - it has been found that microfiltration is the perfect pretreatment to reverse osmosis, reverse osmosis is a technology that has been around for a long time, example is the bottled water companies that take tap water, run it through reverse osmosis, strip the minerals out, add minerals back in according to their 'secret formula' then charge the customer more for that same water; * Using microfiltration in front of reverse osmosis it is possible to produce near store level quality water using less energy and at a lower cost; I . A new, high technology membrane treatment facility will be built in Fountain Valley, where Water Factory 21 is today, the water will be injected into the sea water intrusion barrier, actually expanding that capability, the rest of the water will be put into a seventy-eight inch pipe to run along the Santa Ana River up to one of the percolation ponds where it will filter through the ground into one of the deep aquifers, they, like the I I I 10-25-99 bottled water companies, will need to add minerals to this water because it is so pure and if that were not done it would eventually leach the lining of the pipe and destroy the pipe; Question was posed as to the time frame from the microfiltration process, by the time it reaches the holding basin, seeps back down the aquifer, and is pumped back out by the Water District - response was that depends on where you are, if one were waiting for this water to come back down to Seal Beach it would be decades, a matter of years in Anaheim, when this is done in Fountain Valley it will be put into the process to be percolated through; * A comparison of this near distilled water with other sources of water, it is the finest water than can be put into the groundwater basin - the membrane technology that will be used will be looked at by NASA for space travel; * * This project demonstrates a problem that will be resolved although it was not designed for this purpose - recalling the example of the one acre foot of water over the football field, there is one ton of salt in one acre of Colorado River water, in Orange County most of the imported water, about seventy percent, is from the Colorado River, over time salt can build up the salt in the water supply and pose problems with drinking that water, reusing that water, and someday even with putting it on plants, this will counteract the buildup of salts from the Colorado River water; * Alternatives - groundwater can cost $100 per acre foot, imported water between $450 to $500 per acre foot, and to desalinate an acre foot of ocean water today costs about $2,000, at this time desalinating ocean water is not an option, but as more is learned about the membrane technologies this project could be an interim measure until the cost is lowered to desalinate ocean water; * Benefits - this high quality water can be produced using forty percent less energy than it takes to move water here from either Northern California or the Colorado River, this is not controlled by the agencies that control the San Joaquin/San Francisco Bay Delta and not controlled by the water master of the Colorado River; * Time Line - this will be built in three phases, half the capability of the large pipeline in phase one then it is just a matter of adding microfiltration and reverse osmosis, that is good news as far as cost, this project is water bill neutral, in fact if this project is not done the cost of water will go up higher, the reason for that is that this project has already been funded by the two agencies, loans to build this project will be obtained and the loans will be paid off by selling water which will be cheaper than future imported water, water bills will go up but less with this project; . Supporters - there are many, this is the only project known in California that has the support of the urban entities, the agricultural entities, and environmental entities, those are usually the three groups that are vying for water, noted also the Sea and Sage Audobon, 10-25-99 * Orange County Supervisors, Orange County Taxpayers Association, which means this will truly not be a burden on the general public, the Farm Bureau, and about half of the cities in north Orange County have signed on to this project, it is hoped Seal Beach will do likewise; As the representative to the Sanitation District, Councilman Boyd explained that there are two agencies in the County that deal with water, the Orange County Metropolitan Water District brings the public their water, the Sanitation District takes the waste water, the water that previously went into what was called the sanitary sewer, that water is pumped to the treatment facilities in Fountain Valley where it is processed, that water is called the affluent, at present that processed water is pumped five miles out into the ocean, about two hundred fifty million gallons a day at a cost of about a billion dollars, the bio-solids that come out of that water is then turned into fertilizer, mulch, etc., the proposal with this project, a long term project for a long term problem, is to take the treated waste water, pump it back up the Santa Ana River and let it seep into the ground at the Cramer Holding Basins, then, possibly as soon as two years it will be pumped out via wells, just as is done today, or in some cases as long as two decades depending on ones location in the County, this is recycling of water, it is an environmentally friendly process, without the program it will be necessary to import more water, which is very costly, requires public infrastructure, bonds, debt, does not necessarily increase self-sustainability in cases of drought and water shortages, secondly, it requires the building of a new outfall which means there is more treated waste water being put into the ocean, which is something that agencies are cognizant of today with the issues, even though that is allowed with the EPA permit with little supervision because of the high, strict standards; I I * Request that an explanation be provided with regard to the intrusion barrier - since the 1970's the Orange County Water District has been treating waste water, purifying it to drinking water standards and injecting it into the ground along Beach Boulevard to create a hydraulic mound underground that creates pressure to keep the ocean out of the ground water basin, every year there is more water used out of the ground water basin and as a result what is needed is the doubling of ground water injection wells and doubling the amount of water that is injected underground from fifteen million gallons a day to thirty million gallons, this project will provide that water and allow creation of a larger and stronger barrier; * Mr. Steve Conklin, Water District was introduced to speak to the inland wellfield project that is a study at this point to determine if it would be better to pump water from inland sources, Seal Beach is somewhat on the edge of the water basin; I . To the question of how much water Seal Beach pumps from the ground and how much is purchased, the response was approximately seventy-five percent is pumped, twenty- five percent purchased, most of the time the City runs on ground water, during certain times in summer when I I I 10-25-99 * demands are higher imported water is used, citywide; Mr. Conklin proceeded to describe the West Orange County Wellfield Project - this has been worked on since about 1995, starting with a phase one investigation of the West Orange County water facilities, a draft report was presented and the findings were presented to the West Orange County Water Board in November, 1995; The phase one study was recognition by the participants that the major West Orange County wellfield pipelines have surplus capacity, the ground water quality and quantity issues are larger than anyone agency's boundaries, it is a regional issue, the agencies have individual needs and are planning facilities therefore a joint project might have advantages over individual projects, costwise, getting more for the money, a number of agencies were involved in the study, the cities of Fountain Valley, Garden Grove, Huntington Beach, Newport, Seal Beach, and Westminster, other entities such as the Southern California Water Company, Municipal Water District of Orange County, and the Orange County Water District; * * What was first envisioned as part of this was constructing a wellfield up in the Stanton/Cypress area making use of the existing West Orange County Water Board pipelines, the one that serves Seal Beach is to be the line in Springdale/Westminster, joining the City system to bring water from the Met system into the City, what would be done is construct a wellfield to connect into the pipeline which is under-utilized at certain times of the year to bring well water into the City; * The phase one study came up with several conclusions, that the project did have regional benefit, that it appeared to be cost effective, and that it was worthy of further study; * That was followed with another report referred to as the Coastal Groundwater Management Investigation, done in late 1996, the reason for the report was increasing concern with groundwater extractions, it should be pointed out that groundwater is being pumped harder and faster than it can be replaced in the coastal communities, the agencies wanted to look at other concepts than just wellfields, the final report was completed in November, 1997; * As far as the coastal problem, historically it is low levels of water that had never been seen before, increased variation between high and low levels, the lows were lower than ever before, there was also a concern with colored water encroachment into the system; * A graphic was shown of the water levels at each of their wells, a comparison between the winter and summer seasons, it is cyclical and predictable as to what is going on, however the water levels are getting lower and lower each year, in some places that can mean that the pumps at the bottom are being exposed and the wells will need to be shut down or cut back; . Increased pumping, the demand for all areas of Orange County is going up, the coastal areas too are 10-25-99 * experiencing a significant increase over time of the use of groundwater, that is water that has to be replaced and that does not happen by itself, the pumping is faster than it can be replaced by nature; Recommendations and the next phase - need to rehabilitate the Talbert Injection Barrier, that is where Water Factory 21 water is being injected to prevent sea water intrusion, there is need to get more water into the barrier, the seasonal shift program needs to be modified, a Met program that allows communities to pump more well water, off the Met system in the summer, more Met water in the winter, and receive some monetary benefits in the process; there is need to pursue colored water treatment development, as is presently taking place in Costa Mesa and Irvine; also pursue greater recharge in the lower floor bay which is the area along the Santa Ana River; I * Great strides have been made in improving the amount of injections that take place in the Talbert Barrier, more water was put in this past year than there has been an ability to do in the last two years but more needs to be done; * Long term recommendations - develop inland wellfields for future coastal demand, two different wellfields were proposed, the West Orange County wellfield, another in east Orange County around the Anaheim/Orange area making use of a different pipeline, another wellfield is also proposed up the Santa Ana River near Anaheim or Orange making use of another under-utilized line, a similar concept to bring water down into the coastal area; I * To a wellfield in the area of Katella and Cerritos, an area basically in the vicinity of the race track that is largely undeveloped, question was if that is the reason - the response was affirmative, there are less wells in that region than in the coastal areas, also the area has not been heavily pumped in the past, the water levels are high, and it is believed that wells can be constructed without significantly impacting the water levels in those areas; * Several communities are involved in the West Orange County study, each has identified their future needs, in discussions with Seal Beach the need for one additional well was identified with a capacity of around two thousand gallons a minute, other agencies and cities have identified a need of around twenty-two thousand gallons per minutes, all have identified the need for more water, again, these wells would be located in the Cypress/Stanton area to bring water down towards the coast; I * What is being requested now from Seal Beach and the other members of the Water Board is a letter of support, acknowledging that analysis has shown that the pipelines have surplus available capacity and a request that the Orange County Water District proceed with the phase two study, they can then prepare the study, bring that report back through the West Orange County Water Board which then comes to the cities for review and approval; I I I 10-25-99 The objectives of the phase two study is to modify the concepts that were developed with the phase one study, develop more definitive cost information, evaluate pricing and institutional considerations, and a plan to implement the inland wellfields, this is unique in that the cities are being asked to make use of wells that are not within their corporate boundaries to bring in water, asking others to provide well water, this is a different arrangement and necessitates everyone working together, as a regional water agency it is felt they can help make this happen, a project report will be prepared as well as preliminary design of the facilities~ * The benefits of the inland wellfields - they mitigate the coastal pumping depression, which all of the coastal cities are experiencing, reduce the potential of sea water intrusion, which would have a drastic impact on the economies of all, makes use of existing pipelines that are under-utilized, has minimal impact on the water levels in all of the areas based upon computer modeling, it reduces the potential for underflow to Los Angeles County, a little known facts is that if the water put into the ground is not being pumped out, it is being paid for, yet it is flowing into L.A. County, this reduces that potential impact, and this would allow increased ground water pumping with minimal impact with the increased District demand over time~ * * To a request for explanation of colored water development - it was explained that the coastal areas are underlain by ancient water, likely from thousands of years ago, it is expected that the area actually had redwood forests, over time they were destroyed or changed with time, the area was overlain by other materials, water formed in those layers, the water that was surrounded by the redwood material actually gives the appearance of a tea, the water is a very high quality however it is also colored, the water is over a thousand to fifteen hundred feet deep, it has taste and odor and color which can be removed at a cost, there are plans in development to treat and make use of that water, the Costa Mesa Water District has a plan under construction to make use of that water, Irvine Ranch Water District has another plan, their agency continues to study the treatment of colored water, it is considered to be a valuable resource, low in salts. To a request of Councilmember Campbell, Mr. Ron Wildermuth said he is a retired Navy Captain, his last active duty assignment was as General Schwartzkopf's public relations advisor during the Gulf War. MADD PRESENTATION Chief Sellers introduced Mr. Bob Marlow, the law enforcement liaison for Mothers Against Drunk Drivers of Orange County. Mr. Marlow reported that 1998 was the safest year in the history of Orange County with regard to drunk driving, a direct correlation to the law enforcement officers and their arrests. Mr. Marlow read a portion of the commending proclamations citing the efforts and sacrifices of the officers and reflection upon their Chief, the Department, and the Council~ On behalf of MADD, Mr. Marlow commended Officer Ryan Corbin for twenty-seven drunk driving arrests, Corporal Steve Bowles for thirty-four arrests, and Corporal John Scott for eighty-two arrests, he being an officer that has been 10-25-99 honored for this accomplishment for several years. The Chief noted that the eighty-two arrests by Corporal Scott is low in comparison to past records, this due to his acceptance of additional duties as a training officer. PROCLAMATION Mayor Yost proclaimed October 25th through October 29th, 1999 as "winter Weather and Flood Preparedness Week." I RESOLUTION NUMBER 4759 - RECOGNIZING ASSEMBLYWOMAN SALLY HAVICE Mayor Yost noted the passage of Assembly bills 1355 and 216 which creates the Conservancy for the San Gabriel River Watershed, this a tool for Seal Beach to deal with the water quality issues of the River, there will be a thirteen seat board, two seats for members from Orange County, Seal Beach will attempt to secure one of those seats. He explained that initially AB 1355 did not necessarily deal with water quality rather issues of Havice's district relating to flood control, floodplain, access to recreation areas in the watershed, etc., however when approached with the concerns of Seal Beach from the environmental perspective and representation for Orange County cities, language was added with regard to the environmental issues and two seats on the Conservancy Board added, the Assemblywoman also helped with the funding for the regional bikepath. Mayor Yost mentioned that the proposed Resolution will be presented to Assemblywoman Havice on October 29th. Boyd moved, second by Campbell, to adopt Resolution Number 4758 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL RECOGNIZING AND HONORING FRED KALMICK, SEAL BEACH VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTER OF THE YEAR FOR 1999" and I Resolution Number 4759 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH HONORING AND RECOGNIZING ASSEMBLYWOMAN SALLY HAVICE." By unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution Number 4759 was waived. AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried APPROVAL OF AGENDA Councilman Boyd requested that Items "N" and "0" be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate consideration. The City Manager announced the intended continuance until the next meeting of the public hearing to consider the appeal to the Planning Commission denial of Variance 99-2, as requested by the appellant. Boyd moved, second by Campbell, to approve the order of the agenda as revised. AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried PUBLIC COMMENTS I Mayor Yost declared Public Comments open. Mr. Charles Antos, 14th Street, said he wished to speak regarding City employees and in his opinion a playbook that has been in either the City Manager or personnel office since at least 1983 and is being used, City employees targeted for a variety of reasons, whistle blowers, people who refuse to commit illegal acts, or those who believe that they work for all residents of the community as opposed to just their immediate supervisor. He claimed the procedure is that the employee is not told they are being targeted, that is leaked to the press, the employee 10-25-99 I then finds out, that is what happened to him in 1983, it is now happening again, and may have happened in the past. Mr. Antos stated that the Council has a responsibility to all employees of the City, and it can be confirmed by legal counsel that targeting whistle blowers is a violation of federal law, the leaking of information to the press is likely a violation of employee rights or the California Constitution, this needs to stop, if necessary, go through the Skelly process. He said he has known a number of those who have retired out for twenty years, good employees, and they should not have be treated as they have. Mrs. Gwen Forsythe, Seal Beach, stated that her communication was penned by herself and former Mayor Marilyn Hastings. Apparently a list of dearly departed has been distributed about town naming a multitude of former employees who are no longer with the city, to say that these individuals are all victims of the City Manager is blatant misinformation based on malicious lies. She said during the eight years that she and Ms. Hastings served on the Council a number of employees left, left for many reasons, some included retirement, career advancement or illness, some retirements got contentious because the employee may have requested a platinum handshake yet being a financially strapped City at the time, they had to settle for a less glittering package, some left because the Council took action to cap leave and sick time from accruing in perpetuity, they then chose to not remain as their retirement benefits had peaked, those decisions were made by the then City Council as it was an expenditure of funds, if that created resentment, so be it, that is business and the financial end of the City had to be run that way. In that the blame is with the Council, not Keith Till. Mrs. Forsythe asked if the City is going to continue to run on the fumes of gossip, stories being generated by a handful of personally unhappy people are ludicrous and so embellished by the time they are heard they seem almost laughable, there is an apparent witch hunt in progress and while everyone watches, Rome is burning. She stated it is time that the Council get itself together and start leading this City from the black hole of despair that seems to have settled over City Hall, it is time for the employees to stop backstabbing, sabotaging and gossip, it is crippling this City, affecting the performance of the City and creating ill feelings that will linger for longer than one may wish. Mrs. Forsythe offered that life is too short, get over it, start working cohesively as a productive City Hall to protect this wonderful City from the problems and issues that surface on a regular basis, the taxpayers of the community deserve a healthy and functional local government, focus on the issues and get to work. Mr. Doug Kordhof, Seal Beach, said that the majority of people let things go and let the elected officials do what they want, only when they get out of hand do people take notice, similar happenings have been seen in other cities however for problems one only has to look here in Seal Beach, outside the Chambers is a candlelight vigil, many are joining it, apparently there has been an attack on the orderly running of the City government, the attack similar to the proposed closing of the animal shelter and outsourcing to Long Beach. with regard to the presentation relating to water, he asked why more water is needed and responded that the goal of that scheme is to provide water to build on the Bolsa Chica Mesa, Seal Beach does not need more water, the City needs to live within its means, not import more water, clean up the beaches and the River and live within the water means. One of the things the City has done is the illegal Hellman permit, this was against Section 30233 I I 10-25-99 of the Coastal Act but the Commission went along with it because this is the City government, now you have to rely on the courts to overturn a faulty decision, which it will, that entire area is part of a future flood control basin, that is a way that the water from the San Gabriel can be recharged, the area is not suited for a golf course, development, condos or houses, it was meant for a flood control basin, another I problem is the native Americans where the Council has not yet acknowledged the sacred sites and burials on this their ancestral land, under the coastal laws the system of fee simple possession is imposed but the native Americans were excluded from their land by laws and census, but they have laws and cultures of their own therefore our possession is illegal. Mr. Kordhof then referred to a conflict with the Rossmoor people, asking why a hurry up permit for the Bixby golf course, the people challenged the accuracy of the environmental impact report and they won long enough to cause a referendum and it is expected the referendum will carry. Why is this happening, maybe there is a problem with the employees, maybe there should be some thought about this. There are birds and creatures that used to call the nearly seven hundred trees home, the ensuing landscape and traffic impact will galvanize College Park East and Rossmoor residents into uncustomary militancy, now, the expansion of the bridge over the freeway is just one more issue, violates sacred sites and without a qualified native American monitor, the huge Bixby project should not exist, the decimated landscape never should have been destroyed and should be recreated. Ms. Mitzi Morton, Seal Beach, said she has been a resident for thirty years, has seen six city managers come and go, but the majority of the employees have remained with I the city throughout good and bad times, yet she has never seen employees in the past with such low morale and so disturbed as there is now. She said she would not blame the City Manager because she is uncertain as to what the major problems are, however it is known that the employees are afraid to speak out, they trust no one. It is the responsibility of the Council to investigate what is happening in this City, the employees deserve something better after being loyal all of these years, one of the problems is loyalty, are employees supposed to be loyal to the City or the City Manager, that is a question that the Council needs to decide to resolve the problems. Mr. Reg Clewley, Seal Beach, recalled a recent town hall meeting to discuss an issue of dogs in Gum Grove Park, it appears that someone got a ticket so now there are suggestions to change the law because someone broke the law, an avoidance of having to enforce the law. A suggestion was made by dog owners to have two acres of land for dogs to run, a dog park in Gum Grove is the wrong place, that is an environmentally sensitive area, the property technically belongs to Hellman, a solution would be to use the 1.8 acres owned by the City at the end of Lopez Drive rather than give that parcel to Hellman, that would solve the dog problem, then enforce the I laws. It was confirmed by staff that a portion of the referenced land is currently a fenced dog run. Mr. Ron Bennett, Seal Beach, said although he has respect for Ms. Morton he personally has a somewhat different slant on the employee issue, recalling that at the last meeting he attended there were personal attacks to the Council, City Attorney, City Manager, to him attacks are cheap and easy, but staff can not defend themselves. Mr. Bennett recalled also that in 1995 there was no reserve fund, required to be $l million, it had been used for day to day expenses, there was no capital improvement plan, the City, like homes, 10-25-99 I factories, etc., deteriorates continually, things need to be replaced. Upon the departure of the prior City Manager the Council then sought a new Manager, supposedly a strong Manager, the current Manager is not a personal friend but in his eyes he is due some respect, once he was aboard a meeting was requested and attended by three business persons, they offered ideas, all agreed that the biggest problem is that a Manager is never in employ long enough to see things through, today there is a million dollar reserve fund, a capital improvement plan, there is beach sand, and some unhappy employees who get three weeks paid vacation after the first year no matter their position, is the Manager unpopular because he has changed things, the answer is yes, the number of employees have been reduced to about a hundred twenty- five, the City ran in a deficit for years, there was no balanced budget, but now things are getting done. Mr. Bennett said there are some people who stand here week after week and insult and degrade, never do a positive thing, if they did something good they might have credibility, an example is the little girl who sold lemonade and gave the money to Save the Pool. There being no other comments, Mayor Yost declared Public Comments closed. COUNCIL ITEMS No Council Items were presented. I CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEMS "G" thru "R-l" The City Attorney noted that Item "R-l", the Resolution sustaining the denial of the two-story manufactured home in the Trailer park, had been provided the Council. Councilman Boyd stated for the record that he would abstain from voting on that item. Yost moved, second by Doane, to approve the recommended action for items on the Consent Calendar as presented, except Items "N" and "0", removed for separate consideration. G. Approved regular demands numbered 25101 through 25304 in the amount of $691,966.09, payroll demands numbered 05520 through 05664 in the amount of $216,053.66, and authorized warrants to be drawn on the Treasury for same. H. Approved the minutes of the regular meeting of October 11th, 1999. J. I. Authorized a letter of support for the Phase 2 Project Report for the West Orange County Wellfield project, Mayor Yost and Councilman Snow to execute same on behalf of the City. Received and filed the Orange County Council of Governments (OCCOG) Draft Report on Performance Indicators and staff comment letter, instructed staff to forward same to the Planning Commission and Environmental Quality Control Board for information purposes and to provide additional status reports as appropriate. I K. Approved Amendment No. 4 to Agreement No. c-a-019? between the City and the Orange County Transportation for the Senior Nutrition Transportation Program, the Amendment reflecting an extension of the term to June 30, 2000 and 10-25-99 reduction of per trip cost, and authorized the City Manager to execute said Amendment on behalf of the City. L. Received and filed the staff report relating to the receipt of the Response to Draft Program Environmental Impact Report for the Orange County Sanitation District Strategic Plan, and instructed staff to forward same to the Environmental Quality Control Board for information purposes. I M. Adopted Resolution Number 4760 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH AUTHORIZING FINAL BUDGET AMENDMENTS FOR THE 1998/99 FISCAL YEAR." By unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution Number 4760 was waived. P. Approved the plans and specifications for Project Number 814, the construction of manholes on Seal Beach Boulevard, and authorized staff to advertise for bids. Q. Adopted Ordinance Number 1451 entitled "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA, MOVING THE DATE OF THE 2000 PRIMARY MUNICIPAL ELECTION FROM THE LAST TUESDAY OF MARCH TO THE FIRST TUESDAY OF MARCH" and Adopted Ordinance Number 1452 entitled "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA, CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF THE HOLDING OF A PRIMARY MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD IN THE CITY ON TUESDAY, MARCH 7th, 2000, CONSOLIDATED WITH THE STATEWIDE PRIMARY ELECTION ON SAID DATE, FOR THE ELECTION OF CERTAIN OFFICERS OF THE CITY AS REQUIRED BY THE PROVISIONS OF THE CHARTER OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH" and I Adopted Resolution Number 4761 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF ORANGE TO CONSOLIDATE A PRIMARY MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON MARCH 7th, 2000 WITH THE STATEWIDE PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY ELECTION TO BE HELD ON THAT DATE PURSUANT TO SECTION 10403 OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTIONS CODE" and Adopted Resolution Number 4762 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDATE FOR ELECTIVE OFFICE PERTAINING TO CANDIDATES STATEMENTS SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS AT THE PRIMARY MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, MARCH 7th, 2000, AND IF NECESSARY, AT THE GENERAL (RUN-OFF) ELECTION ON MAY 9th, 2000." I By unanimous consent, full reading of Ordinances numbered 1451 and 1452, and Resolutions numbered 4761 and 4762 was 10-25-99 waived. R. Adopted Resolution Number 4763 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH APPROVING THE CLOSURE OF THE NORTH AND SOUTHBOUND TURN POCKETS LOCATED AT THE MAIN STREET/PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY INTERSECTION." By unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution Number 4763 was waived. R-l. Adopted Resolution Number 4746 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH SUSTAINING THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION DISAPPROVING MINOR PLAN REVIEW 99-5, A TWO-STORY MANUFACTURED HOME AT 24 COTTONWOOD LANE (SEAL BEACH TRAILER PARK)." By unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution Number 4746 was waived. I AYES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost NOES: None Motion carried ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR I ITEMS "N" and "0" - MONTHLY INVESTMENT REPORTS Councilman Boyd noted the reduction of the investment portfolio some $300,000 which he has been unable to track. The Interim Finance Director stated that $397,000 due from the Orange County Investment Pool had previously been included however has been removed as it is not yet known when those funds will be received, it is a receivable for the General Fund and Reserves. Councilman Boyd asked that a monthly investment balance sheet be provided the Council. Boyd moved, second by Doane, to receive and file the monthly investment reports for August and September, 1999. AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried I STATUS REPORT - MAIN STREET/PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY PROJECT The City Manager presented the update report, noted that the former Shell Station property at Main and Pacific Coast Highway was listed for sale, sold, the Station has now been demolished, application was made to construct a building on that property, in response to the applicant's inquiry as to what type of building would be desired, staff asked that a building be designed that would have frontage near the sidewalk on both the Highway and Main Street, which in retrospect may not have been the best advice, this in keeping with the Main Street Specific Plan and that the building have as few breaks in the storefront appearance as possible, reducing conflicts with cars on Main Street, continuing the mid-western town look, the eventual problems with the project may have arisen in trying to transfer that look to the Pacific Coast Highway portion of the project, yet the intent was to create an entryway to Main Street that would reflect the Street from its beginning. He noted however the design created considerable concerns with the public, that was evidenced by comments made at the informal public information sessions held on the project, one concern was that by having the buildings at sidewalk edge would block the view of Main Street from the Highway rather than create a view corridor, that the businesses proposed would be in competition with existing businesses rather than compliment them, there were comments as to the tenant mix that the community would 10-25-99 prefer, comments were favorable of the design and materials however for a location elsewhere as it was not felt that the design fit the eclectic mix of Main Street, preference was also that the project be set back on the property to allow more landscaping and a softer feel. The Manager mentioned that the applicant had however completed the design and plans and had gone through one hearing before the Planning I Commission, question was raised regarding parking for the two thousand square foot building that was to house a Starbucks coffee house, the Seal Beach Code defines coffee house as an establishment with ten or fewer seats and no greater than one thousand square feet, anything greater than that square footage is required to come before the City for a conditional use permit. He noted that the meeting was not noticed correctly, that created community concern, public information meetings were held, at that point the decision was with the applicant, they could have gone forward before the Planning Commission however likely with community opposition and then possibly through the appeal process, however the applicant chose to redesign the project taking into consideration the concerns that had been expressed by the community, they have advised the City that they will not be pursuing a two thousand square foot building to house Starbucks, it is understood that Starbucks declined to accept a building of a thousand or less square feet, understood also that there are currently no tenants under lease, and the applicant has requested City acceptance of the current building design. The Director of Development Services directed attention to drawings reflecting the elevations and basic design as currently proposed, the prior design showed the buildings fronting the sidewalk with parking to the rear of the I property which was a subject of community concern, the current design has the building located on the southerly portion of the property next to the driveway adjacent to Charo Chicken, the entry to the parking area from Pacific Coast Highway will be immediately east of the alley off of the Highway, an exit only driveway from the parking area onto Main Street with a right turn only towards the ocean, the driveway from the Highway will be for either entry or exit. He explained that the new design concept addresses a number of issues mentioned by the City Manager, the building is set back some distance from Pacific Coast Highway allowing a clear view across the parking area to the commercial corridor of Main Street by motorists traveling the Highway, landscaping is provided along the frontages of both Main Street and the Highway, there will be signage at the corner identifying this as an entry to the Main Street area and likely some tenant identification as well, the building is now proposed as five thousand nine hundred square feet as compared to the prior more than six thousand one hundred fifty square feet, the parking requirement under the City's standards is thirteen spaces, they will have nineteen, fifteen full size and four compact spaces, it is felt the design provides a pedestrian oriented entrance to the building, the plan appears to comply with all City standards, I once it has been reviewed further to assure compliance the plan will then be approved in concept so that they may submit to the Coastal Commission to seek a Coastal permit, any changes required by the Commission would then be reviewed by the City, once the requirements of both agencies have been met building permits could be issued and construction commenced. The Director pointed out that since there are no tenants proposed for the building at this time there is no requirement for a conditional use permit, should a use be proposed in the future that does require such permit that 10-25-99 I would then be considered under public hearing. With regard to a question relating to vehicle turning movements, the Director explained again that exit from the parking area onto Main Street would be a right turn only, it would likely be necessary to travel to Marina Drive to travel westbound on PCH, this property has no easy access. The Manager mentioned that the applicant has invited ideas as to what is thought to be an ideal tenant at this location. Question was posed if the Chamber of Commerce has done anything to research tenants that may be interested or desired for future opportunities. It was the consensus of the Council to receive and file the status report. I RESPONSE - NOTICE OF PREPARATION - DRAFT EIR - BIXBY LONG BEACH PROJECT The Director of Development Services reported that the City of Long Beach has issued a Notice of Preparation for an Environmental Impact Report, a first step to make other agencies and local governments aware of a proposed project that has had initial review and has been determined will require an EIR, this inviting other agencies to make comments to the issuing agency of any concerns there may be. He noted this is a substantial project, five hundred twenty-four residential units on approximately fifty acres primarily along Westminster Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway, four hundred forty thousand square feet of business park on approximately twenty-eight acres basically behind the Market Place and extending to Westminster Avenue, restoration and enhancement of about one hundred eleven acres of wetlands, and a major transportation improvement with the extension of Studebaker Road from Westminster Avenue to Pacific Coast Highway, the area primarily wetland/oil extraction at this time. He stated that the Notice indicates that Long Beach will be evaluating every issue possible because most everything will have some type of impact. The Director explained that staff reviewed at the document in order to prepare a comment letter from the City Council indicating specific areas of concern that it is felt Long Beach needs to make certain is included in the EIR document, the primary concern would be traffic issues, how it would flow into and out of Seal Beach, and with the extension of Studebaker Road to Pacific Coast Highway how would that change in traffic flow impact the bridge on PCH over the San Gabriel River, the letter also cites air quality, aesthetic, etc. issues, once a draft EIR is prepared by Long Beach there will be at least a forty-five day public review and comment period during which staff will prepare written comments for the EQCB and City Council consideration. To a question if Loynes is a project boundary, the Director responded that it is however it is believed that Loynes is basically a wetland area. Councilman Boyd noted that the comment letter is to the attention of the Environmental Manager and requested that it also be forwarded to the members of the Long Beach City Council. Boyd moved, second by Doane, to receive and file the staff report and authorize the Mayor to sign the response letter on behalf of the City. I AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried ORANGE COUNTY FIRE AUTHORITY - AGREEMENT AMENDMENTS The City Manager stated that this is a project that every member of the Orange County Fire Authority has worked on for about three years, at certain stages of what was called the equity study close to a half million dollars was at stake for 10-25-99 Seal Beach for contract service increases when under one of the formulas the City was deemed to be underpaying its share, with some of the cities having been deemed to be overpaying, this amended agreement is much more favorable to Seal Beach. Councilman Boyd noted that this issue took some twenty cities and the County of Orange considerable time to reach agreement. He explained that Seal Beach has been under contract with the County for fire and paramedic services since 1982, in 1995 the County Fire Department was dissolved and the Fire Authority formed, the intent was to provide a greater level of service and accountability to the member cities, provide for an independent governing board made up of council members and two members of the Board of Supervisors instead of a fire chief and the supervisors which provided very little accountability to the member cities. The Authority commenced addressing the issue of funding and financing, especially long term, that issue was postponed for three years, discussions have now been on-going for a period of nineteen months with two or three revisions of a consultant study as to how to provide long term stability of the Authority. The amended agreement provides a long term cost saving to Seal Beach, the annual cost increase now equates to about $90,000 per year, an annual cost of about $2.7 million, this was an opportunity to draft a contract for fire and paramedic services for a period of ten years with a fixed cap rate, which means every year the City will have knowledge of the annual cost, that is different between cities because of their tax base, in Seal Beach, a contract city, the cost comes out of the General Fund annually, others have a structural fire fund tax on their property tax bill, this agreement provides a financing structure that is amenable to each Authority member, the governing structure was changed, the way the board operates, a number of things that insure long term stability for the Fire Authority. With regard to inequities, that was basically financing issue, this agreement assures equal treatment to all member agencies in the County, develops a uniform model for how fire protection is implemented, defines how fire protection, financing and rates, is provided to new agencies, and for Seal Beach, a cap of 3.5 percent for the first five years, 4 percent for the second five years, cutting nearly in half the increase of recent years, it allows bond financing to assist with capital and long term needs of the Authority, a ten year contract, and the cap is locked in. Councilman Boyd said his recommendation would be approval of the amended Agreement. Councilmember Campbell asked if an annual recap is provided as to fire services versus paramedic services, to that Councilman Boyd stated that the Fire Chief has been requested to provide such report to the Board on a weekly basis, from that he will provide a summary of utilization, to include a breakdown of calls within the City. As a point of information, the Authority serves about 1.4 million people directly, indirectly about 2.1 million, fire services covering 511 square miles, a budget of $183 million, 62 fire stations, and about 2,400 people on the floor. Doane moved, second by Campbell, to approve the amendments to the Joint Powers Agreement creating the Orange County Fire Authority. I I I AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to declare a recess at 8:50 p.m. The Council reconvened at 8:57 p.m. with Mayor Yost calling the meeting to order. 10-25-99 I PUBLIC HEARING - DECLARATION OF PUBLIC NUISANCE - 112 - 8th STREET - MAULDIN Mayor Yost declared the public hearing open to consider a declaration of a public nuisance and abatement procedures for property located at 112 - 8th Street. The City Clerk reported that notice of the public hearing had been advertised as required by law, the property owner was notified, the property posted, and that a communication was received from Mr. Tim Mauldin dated October 21st. The Assistant Planner presented the staff report relating to the request to declare the property and dwelling located at 112 - 8th Street ~s a public nuisance, this property adjacent to the alley in the 100 block. He reported that staff first became aware of this property in July after several complaints about trash and debris being stored in the yard, items observed included fixtures, a sink, storage locker, gasoline tank, etc., also observed were broken windows, at that point a letter was drafted to the property owner detailing the debris in the yard, and requested to do an inspection of the house to determine if there was structural damage or health and safety concerns. He said at that time the resident, Mr. Bill Mauldin asked that the City work with him, allowed the City to enter the property on August 9th, he stated the property was part of a large estate owned by his mother, Mr. Mauldin would not allow photos to be taken of the interior of the structure, said he and the Senior Building Inspector found several violations of the Building Code, exposed wiring, open hot wires, holes in the walls that allowed one to look directly into the second floor, no plumbing on the ground floor, no fixtures in the first floor bathroom, the rear porch was damaged and dryrotted to the point that any significant amount of weight would have caused it to fall to the ground. The Assistant Planner explained that at that time the resident would not allow staff to look into the kitchen or the downstairs bedroom, describing those areas as being unsafe, he showed a photograph showing the exterior debris as it existed in August, and at that time the resident said he would handle all of the problems pertaining to the property, said also that he had had some friends do work on the electrical and plumbing on the property, investigation showed that no permits had been issued for any of the work that the resident described, thus either done illegally or not by a licensed person. Notice was then prepared that gave the property owner or resident thirty days to correct the listed violations, also allow the City to check the kitchen and extra bedroom for other violations, at the end of the thirty days nothing had been done, staff was going to bring the matter to the attention of Council at that time however the uncle of the resident, Bruce Mauldin, contacted the City and informed staff that he would be representing the family and that staff should work with him, after several weeks of communication nothing had occurred, about mid-September the water service was discontinued because of non-payment, several notices were given the resident and sent to the property owner, nothing happened, at that time the resident was informed that the structure was not fit for human habitation due to lack of water and the other conditions of the property, shortly thereafter complaints were received that the resident was taking water from other surrounding properties for his personal use. A culmination of that came when staff told Mr. Bruce Mauldin that the City needed to be granted admittance to look at the kitchen and extra bedroom, staff was told to meet him on September 29th, staff met at the property with Mr. Tim Mauldin, the father of Bill Mauldin and brother of Bruce I I 10-25-99 Mauldin, he requested staff to wait outside while he spoke with the resident, after about forty-five minutes Mr. Tim Mauldin advised staff that they would not be granted admittance to the property and that he would do whatever necessary to have the occupant exit the property. Later that afternoon staff learned that the property had been vacated by Mr. Bill Mauldin, at that point staff determined to lock down I the structure and board the windows to block entry or exit by any person. During the next couple weeks staff worked with Mr. Bruce Mauldin to establish another time when staff could enter and view the rest of the structure, during that time period Mr. Tim Mauldin removed belongings and debris from the interior so that a contractor could determine the cost of doing repairs if in fact that would be the direction the family wanted to go to bring the structure up to Code, on October 19th the cleanup had been completed, the Senior Inspector and himself returned for a second inspection and were granted access to the kitchen and second bedroom, what was found was significantly more damage than was expected, the center of the structure had actually slipped a couple of inches as compared to the outside of the structure, a bookcase sits at about a twenty degree angle, this is perceived to be due to a break in the water and sewage lines that has been draining under the property for an unspecified amount of time, the kitchen does not exist, there is no sink, no fixtures, no plumbing. The Assistant said it is the belief of staff that the family is willing to work with the City to correct the situations on the property however no actions have been seen to this point which is the reason this item is now before the Council for a declaration of public nuisance. The Assistant explained that Section 14-9 of the I Municipal Code provides the definition of a public nuisance, that Section fits this property well, Section 14-10 grants authority to the City Council to declare a property such as this as a public nuisance, the first step is to declare the public nuisance and then grant the owner a certain amount of time to abate the nuisance, this the basis under which any future actions would take place, the next step would be for the Director of Public Works to draft a notice to abate the public nuisance, as provided by the Code, after the time allotted to abate, a hearing is set before a hearing officer where the property owner or any interested party may testify, at that point the hearing officer would make a decision, if there is no appeal then the property owner would have to either abate the public nuisance or it becomes a misdemeanor, if there is appeal the matter would again come to the City Council for a final decision. As to the current condition of the property, he acknowledged that the property has been cleared of debris yet the more important safety issues on the inside of the dwelling have not been addressed in any way, the rear porch, windows, etc. The procedure for notice, abatement, and hearing was again explained, a suggested time frame for abatement was three to four weeks, the hearing officer is the Director of Public Works, as to an adequate period of time for repair it was stated that if a licensed I contractor were to submit plans to bring the property up to Code that would be acceptable, the dwelling is thought to have been built in the 1920's, explained again that the property is unsafe, the structure is leaning to the side, the property has been deemed to be uninhabitable, there is no intent of condemnation, in a worst case scenario the City could bulldoze the property and place a lien on the property to recover its costs. The Assistant City Attorney noted that an abatement action by the City and assessment of costs is still down line, the recommended action at this point gives 10-25-99 I the property owner a legal incentive to bring the property into compliance, without the declaration the City has no legal basis to force compliance with the order. The Director of Development Services made reference to the October 21st letter from the owners of the property indicating that they are looking at taking a number of different steps to try to resolve the problem, staff has had good relations with the owners thus far, there is no intent to have an adversarial relationship, at this point they want to take some time to determine what they want to do, from the City's standpoint there needs to be assurance that if the time frame begins to be lengthy it can keep the process moving and not have to come back to initiate the process again. He said the recommendation of staff is to consider the position of the property owners, the City understands their position, is willing to work with them, but also feel the Council needs to make this declaration. The Assistant City Attorney noted that the request from the owners is to delay the proceedings for abatement, his previous comment had been with an abatement process in the case of the City having to take the action which would be a considerable time in the future, therefore delay would not be necessary at this point as that process is not forthcoming soon, it would be helpful for staff to have the proposed declaration in place to spur on the property owner. The Assistant Planner confirmed again that the property is not safe, the City does not want people going in and out, and it is not known whether or not a contractor has been retained for repair of the structure. I Mayor Yost invited members of the audience wishing to speak to this item to come to the microphone and state their name and address for the record. Mr. Tim Mauldin introduced himself as the son of the property owner, Mrs. Jean Mauldin, and father of the resident will Mauldin, that he was speaking on behalf of his mother, the sole owner of the 112 - 8th Street property, the individual who will make the decisions although he or his brother may speak on her behalf from time to time, her family has been in continuous ownership since 1906. Mr. Mauldin said it has been correctly represented that the exterior of the property has been cleared of debris, it is not now overgrown and someone has been retained to cut the lawn every other week. Mr. Mauldin stated that his mother resides in Arizona, the post office here has been remiss in not forwarding mail to her on a monthly or even on an every other month basis. Mr. Mauldin confirmed that his son, the occupant of the building, had been asked to leave the building, did not leave, and did not forward mail or notify her of the condition or the problems, as soon as the notices were received Mrs. Mauldin immediately asked that he himself remove the debris and have the yard maintained, which he did as quickly as possible, also asked that the occupant, who was occupying the building without permission, be removed and that the house be completely emptied to enable an accurate inspection by the Senior Building Inspector, on the day he arrived at the property the occupant was resistant however it soon became apparent that he had left through the back door, and as he personally exited the front door he notified the Senior Inspector and the Assistant Planner to move forward to board up the building and that removal of possessions would be done another time, that was accomplished by the end of that day. Subsequent to that day the house has been locked and sealed off from entry unless permission were granted by the City, the house has been emptied of nearly all contents, the utilities disconnected, and they do agree that the house is non-occupiable and should remain sealed, at this I 10-25-99 time the property is not noxious to the neighborhood, the yard has been cleared of all debris, vehicles, tall grass, and is being maintained by a yard service, no fire danger exists to the house or the neighbors, there are no occupancy problems, there is no physical danger to any person because it is non-occupied and non-occupiable. Mr. Mauldin said given the quick response to the City once notification had I been received an order of abatement is felt to be excessive and unnecessary, the immediate necessity of the noxious exterior conditions and occupancy of the building deemed unsafe has been eliminated. The owner, Mrs. Mauldin, pledges to maintain the exterior free of vehicles or debris with the understanding that service vehicles will need access during working hours, continue regular yard service, to cooperate with the City for control of admittance, proceed with repair or sale of the property, to solicit bids for repairs necessary for safe and sanitary occupancy as required by the notice dated August 10th, this includes repair of windows, ceilings, walls, floors, plumbing, electrical, replacement of rear door with an acceptable door, installation of stair handrails, heater installation, smoke detector installation, installation of a new stove, all as detailed on pages two and three of the City notice. He said subsequent to the bidding process the owner will make the economic decision to proceed with contracting for the repairs or to proceed with the sale of the property, concurrently, as of right now, the owner is proceeding with discussions with local realtors and other interested persons for the sale of the property at fair market value as established by comparable recent sales, should the decision be made to not proceed with the needed repairs the property will be put on the market, non-occupied I and the yard maintained pending sale. In return for these pledges the owner, Mrs. Mauldin, requests the City to put into abeyance the proceedings of abatement, she understands that the Council at any meeting following notice may reinstitute abatement proceedings should the terms of this agreement be violated by the owner, she has also agreed to pay the water bill, although she had ordered that the water be turned off it had been turned back on without her approval. It is felt that should the order of abatement proceedings continue at this point that the actual time requirements of dealing with contractors in a timely fashion according to the time tables that have been mentioned in the notices are not feasible, this is a period of time when the contractors are quite busy, as is certain the City is aware, getting contractors out, submitting bids, etc. is not something that can reasonably happen even within a three week period, the family will not delay, the desire is to clear this up one way or the other. It is also the case that should Mrs. Mauldin decide to put the property on the market for sale that a closed time period makes for an unwise decision making process as far as soliciting people to make offers and so on, it is known that multiple real estate transactions are not instantaneous, they do take time. Councilman Doane noted the mention of the water being turned I back on, it is hoped that the lawn will be watered otherwise there will be nothing to cut. Mr. Mauldin responded that given the condition of the plumbing the size of the water bill is most likely due to a leak that is under ground, therefore the short answer is no, the City has turned off all utilities to the property. Question was posed as to how much time the family feels is necessary to put this property into reasonable shape, the response of Mr. Mauldin was that is uncertain, a reasonable bid period would be about a month to month and a half, one contractor has visited the property 10-25-99 I however no bid has been received as yet. Question was asked as to when a decision will be made to either repair the property or sell it, the response was likely upon receipt of two or three bids so that the property owner can see whether or not she would want to make that investment. Question too, under the process of abatement, would the City have the right to extend the time period if it is known that the property owner is trying to correct the situation. The Assistant City Attorney responded that the Council is not being asked to set a time frame at this point, after taking action on the declaration the time would be at the discretion of staff, if the rehab or the sale is moving forward staff will consider that, if it is not going forward then staff would issue the notice of a time period at that stage. Dr. Rosenman, 8th Street, pointed to this as an unusual circumstance, this is a first step, the City needs to start the process by taking the first step. Just to reiterate, Mr. Mauldin said he understands the history, how this came about, the necessity to correct the conditions, the actual nuisance of the property is non-existent at the moment because the exterior is not a nuisance and occupancy has been eliminated, therefore there is no danger to others and the nuisance value does not exist. To a question if there is a disruption of water and sewer lines under the house, Mr. Mauldin responded that he understands there is, but because the house is not occupied there is no water in or water out, the understanding is that the water has been turned off at the perimeter of the property. Councilman Doane mentioned that he has noticed the condition of this property since the early 1990's and is surprised that the family did not recognize that there was a problem. Mrs. Mauldin, the property owner, said she has paid people to keep up the yard, one was a neighbor that it is understood has made several complaints recently, he has said he could not get in to clean around the motorcycles and parts, it was wrong for the occupant to have those things in the yard, but that did not prohibit someone from doing the lawn in that they were being paid to do so, and agreed that the yard was appalling. She said the grandson was .not supposed to be there, previously he, his wife and baby had lived there, when that family broke up the grandson fell apart. The house is as it was built, she was disturbed when the post office delivered the notices, which she believes was the final day of the thirty day extension period, she called the City immediately, she also called a friend that said he would clear the house and do the repairs but he could not gain entrance, and she was personally not able to insist that her grandson leave. Mrs. Mauldin acknowledged that the motorcycles and the parts belonged to her grandson, she knows nothing about cars, there were none, but people who frequent the bars sometimes park in her yard and leave debris, dumpsters of the restaurants knocked down their fence many times in the past, she never complained but did ask that they be removed from her property. To a question of the Mayor, Mrs. Mauldin stated that her grandson is being cared for, also, buildings near her property and parked cars have cut off most of their ocean view, it seems if a lot of people do business out of their garages, she did not think it fair to say the property had been in poor condition for years. There being no further comments, Mayor Yost declared the public hearing closed. Councilmember Boyd said he was sympathetic to this situation yet this type of circumstance can still cause a public nuisance, the request is to declare a public nuisance which will allow City staff to do its job. I I 10-25-99 Councilman Boyd moved to adopt Resolution Number 4764 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 112 - 8th STREET TO BE A PUBLIC NUISANCE", provided that the property owner be allowed a period of forty-five days to make a decision as to the disposition of the property, to either rehabilitate or sell the property. Councilman Snow seconded the motion. With regard to the time frame, Councilman Doane said he did not feel that should be a major factor so long as it can be seen that progress is being made. Mayor Yost agreed, expressing concern also with the rights of property owners, of concern too is if there is a break in the water or sewer lines which could impact other properties. The motion was amended to allow flexibility of the time frame. I AYES: NOES: Boyd, Campbell, Doane, Snow, Yost None Motion carried PUBLIC HEARING - NEGATIVE DECLARATION 99-1 - SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD I I-405 OVERCROSSING WIDENING - GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY Mayor Yost declared the public hearing open to consider Negative Declaration 99-1 relating to the Seal Beach Boulevard/I-405 Overcrossing Widening Project and determination of General Plan consistency. The City Clerk certified that notice of the public hearing had been advertised as required by law, more than six hundred notices mailed, and reported no communications received relating to this item. The Director of Development Services presented the staff report, explained that this item is consideration of a Negative Declaration for environmental review of the proposed widening of the 405 freeway overpass at Seal Beach Boulevard. He noted that the staff is aware of a potential referendum process relating to certain portions of the Bixby Ranch project, that project would provide a significant amount of traffic impact fees towards this improvement project, there is awareness that due to the referendum the traffic impact fees may not be realized, greatly reducing the amount of money that would be forthcoming to the City. Irregardless, to this point in time the City has obtained approximately $2.5 million of discretionary funds through the OCTA Measure M program for this project, a project that has been a goal of the City since 1975 when the first Circulation Element was adopted and where it was stated this was a project that the City should work towards accomplishing, the estimate of total traffic impact fees from the Bixby project was $1.6 to $1.8 million depending upon the tenants of the commercial buildings, the final cost of the project has yet to be determined thus the contribution of the City is unknown at this time. To a question of Council, the Director confirmed that no funding would be forthcoming from the City of Los Alamitos. Mayor Yost indicated that the funding is dependent upon the commercial project being approved and the referendum being defeated. The Director explained that the project is to widen the bridge overpass between the northbound off-ramps and the southbound on- and off-ramp complex, Seal Beach Boulevard is six lanes of travel dimension on both sides of the bridge, the travel lanes narrow to four lanes on the bridge, the proposal is to widen the bridge by forty-four feet, provide a full six travel lanes across the bridge so that there is not a constriction of traffic movements as persons travel over the bridge. The Director noted that the Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project by the consulting firm of Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates, the Environmental Quality I I 10-25-99 I Control Board reviewed the draft Negative Declaration, a memorandum was forwarded with revisions that they recommended to the text and additional mitigation measures that have now been included in the resolution, the Planning Commission conducted their public hearing, a draft of the minutes of that discussion has been provided the Council, the recommendation of the Commission was approval of the Negative Declaration and that this project be found consistent with the General Plan. He noted the Negative Declaration determines that there are no significant impacts from the project as mitigated with the conditions proposed in the Mitigation Program, an attachment to the resolution. The Director said a summary of the what is proposed to the existing four span, pre-cast "I" girder bridge is a widening to six lanes, consistent with the General Plan, eliminate the bottleneck that occurs at both ends of the bridge, this project is included in the seven year Capital Improvement Program, also included in the Regional Transportation Program adopted by the Southern California Association of Governments. The widening will be forty-four feet and occur on the westerly side of the bridge adjacent to the Bixby Office Park, City reservoir and fire station, the project will include medians, sidewalks, and bike lanes over the bridge to provide safer pedestrian and bike transportation, the majority of the proposed improvements are located in the existing CalTrans right-of-way, some slivers of right-of-way will be required from Bixby and the Naval Weapons Station however CalTrans already has easements over the Weapons Station portion of the property for this particular use. The Director stated that the objectives of the project are to improve the Boulevard to conform with the General Plan Circulation Element, again, a goal since 1975, if these improvements are not undertaken then what is currently a level of service 'F' will remain over the bridge at both intersections and as traffic increases in the Southern California region with future growth the level of service will remain at 'F' or 'F.7', if the project is completed as designed and proposed at this time the level of service will improve at the northbound off-ramp to the freeway to a level of service 'B' in the morning hours and level of service 'C' in the evening peak hours, the southbound intersection would improve to a level of service 'D' in both morning and evening peak hours, he also displayed a photograph showing the current impact with the merge from three to two lanes southbound. The definition of a Negative Declaration provides that if a project is conditioned as part of the Initial Study process with conditions that eliminate all potential impacts to a level of less than significance, a city can adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration, which is the item before the City Council. He noted the public comment period for the Mitigated Negative Declaration was from July 23rd until August 23rd, a minimum of twenty days is required by State law, thirty days was allowed in this case, during that period a number of comments were received from agencies and individuals, a list of those are provided in the staff report, the consultant in cooperation with Development Services and the office of the City Attorney did prepare a response to the comments, also provided in the staff report. With regard to finding this project to be consistent with the General Plan, as indicated earlier the initial Circulation Element for the City was adopted in 1975, that document identified Seal Beach Boulevard as a major street having one hundred twenty feet of right-of-way from Pacific Coast Highway to the northerly City boundary, the only area not having one hundred twenty feet is the bridge. Language I I 10-25-99 within the Circulation Element at that time provided for a capital improvement program for the Seal Beach Boulevard/I- 405 improvement, the text of that page included in this staff report, the project is included in the adopted Seven Year Capital Improvement program, included in the SCAG 1998/2005 Regional Transportation Improvement Program, that Program is the overall Transportation Improvement Program for the SCAG I Region which includes all federal, county, and local projects, those projects are required to go through a consistency review at SCAG to assure that they are in accordance with the growth forecast and traffic improvement management programs that SCAG generates as the regional planning agency under authorization of federal law, therefore it is important that the project be consistent. The Director noted that this project was reviewed during the Bixby discussions by the Council, the bridge was clearly described as an improvement project, it should be noted that the mitigation measures for the project did not require the bridge widening, that was not a condition of approval of the project nor was it a mitigation measure imposed by the Council, the reason is that this is a separate project, on- going for a number of years. It is recommended that the Council make a couple of findings regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration, first, that the document adequately discloses the potential environmental impacts, that there will be no substantial adverse impacts that would result upon the approval of the project, second, that the proposed project is consistent with the Circulation Element of the City's General Plan, third, that the project is consistent with the language in the Circulation Element which identifies the project to be within the capital improvement program and I would meet that goal of the Circulation Element, and last, that the project is included within the adopted Seven Year Capital Improvement program. The recommendation is to adopt the Negative Declaration as revised based upon the comments of the consultant and the EQCB, and determine that the Seal Beach Boulevard/I-405 Overcrossing Widening is consistent with the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Councilmember Campbell questioned when drawings would be available, if the widening will be on one or both sides, she had not thought there would be enough room on the one side. The Director responded that the widening will take place on one side, the Bixby Office Park side, the drawings were included in the Mitigated Negative Declaration document that had been provided the Council, explained that there is a slope on the westerly side towards the parking lot area of the Fire Station, the widening will not go into that parking area, a retaining wall may be built, the bridge will be closer to the parking area and the cellular antennas located in the area. To question as to why not widen on the easterly side, the Director of Public Works reported that widening on the west side is because that is what CalTrans originally intended, there'is a crown, high point, in the roadway, when you widen a bridge you must keep in mind the clearance over I the existing freeway, the way this bridge was originally designed was that it be widened on the westerly side, there is more than adequate space, it is conservatively shown with retaining walls however it is felt with some slight design deviations those could be eliminated, just some regrading. Councilman Boyd requested that the westerly widening be further clarified with a report back to the Council, also asked that the Council have the opportunity to review the plans. It was again pointed out that the plan was shown in the staff report. Councilman Snow inquired if there would be 10-25-99 I lane closure during the period of construction. The Public Works Director responded that at this point it is difficult to tell because the plans have not been refined, it seems reasonable that there will be some narrowing of lanes, possibly some reduction of the current four lanes during certain non-peak hours if found necessary, the traffic lanes will be moved over as far as possible, likely prohibit pedestrians during construction, yet every attempt will be made to maintain four lanes. With regard to CEQA requirements, Councilman Boyd asked what determines a Mitigated Negative Declaration versus a full EIR. The Director of Development Services said the primary difference is the ability to reduce environmental impacts to a level that is less than significant, if that can be done through the adoption of mitigation measures as part of the project proposal then the project can be approved through a Mitigated Negative Declaration, if there are impacts that can not be reduced to a level of less than significance then an EIR must be done, he confirmed that the document before the Council is generated from the Development Services Department, the consultant prepares the technical documentation to support the determination of the Negative Declaration. Councilman Snow inquired about a statement that something needs to be done by December of 1999 in order to retain the $2.5 million Measure M funds, to that the Director responded that those funds are available to the City for specified periods of time, one is that the City meet certain requirements that obligates the expenditure of those funds, to meet the deadlines for that program the environmental process would need to be done by about the first of the year. Councilmember Campbell inquired why the environmental document was not sent to the Armed Forces Reserve Center, the response was that they are not an agency having particular concern with what happens at the freeway, by law each adjoining city must be noticed. Councilman Boyd said it would be thought that any improvements to the area in terms of traffic flow or circulation would enhance the services of the AFRC. I I Mayor Yost invited members of the public wishing to comment on this item to come to the microphone and identify themselves. Mr. Doug Kordhof, Marina Hill resident, stated that this project, like the Bixby project in the wetlands, is dead, is not going anywhere, the traffic problem on the Boulevard is not the bridge, it is Lampson, the street going into Rossmoor, and Katella, they are the problems, so why would one spend $2.5 million to build a bridge, the answer is that it will help the Bixby project because if that project ever goes in it will make the traffic snarl at Lampson, into Rossmoor, and at Katella so much worse it will be unmitigatable according to the Bixby EIR. Why spend $2.5 million, rather live within the means of the City, if the bridge goes in then the Bixby project will be inevitable and then houses on both sides can start to be torn down to widen the Boulevard more, things will just be made worse with the Bixby project, and spoil the relations with the Rossmoor and College Park East people for decades. Mr. Kordhof said there are four problems with the Mitigated Negative Declaration, human remains have been found on the property that indicates there were native American issues here, relationships have not been established with the native American tribes, within the Negative Declaration it has to state that a native American monitor is to be notified rather than say and/or the archaeologist, the archaeologist and the native American liaison has to be approved by the relative tribe, the monitor 10-25-99 too, also said this is not a separate project, it is part of the Bixby project, an entire EIS has to be done for the entire project. Mr. Chris Caldwell, stated he was the attorney for the City of Los Alamitos, Century National Properties, and Rossmoor Homeowners Association, said they had submitted written comments however he did not intend to repeat them, just convey a couple of comments before action is taken. First and most importantly is the fact that the response to comments prepared with respect to their comments does not address the issue, it is not believed it puts this project in a position where it complies with CEQA, it is believed that the comments heard this evening, including those of the Planning Director, with regard to the funding of this project and the relation of this project and the Bixby project do not establish them as separate projects, there is one project in piecemeal, this an issue that was previously brought to the attention of the Council at the time' of the Bixby approval and it was the choice to not address the issue at that time either. He said they would request for that reason that the final revised EIR for the Bixby project be included as part of the administrative record for this Negative Declaration as well as the Bixby Development Agreement because they believe that the Bixby Development Agreement shows that some of the mitigation measures that are now being added to this Mitigated Negative Declaration are infeasible because they can not be required by the City of Seal Beach under the terms of the Development Agreement, that is another new problem that has been evidenced by the response to comments. Mr. Caldwell said they would ask that the transparencies of the power point presentation from today also be included as part of the record because they further show the relationship between the two projects. He said they requested as part of their comments that information be provided as to whether eucalyptus trees would be affected or destroyed by the project, that information was not provided in the response to comments, as a result not only did he visit the site today but he also spoke to an arborist and, as was suggested in their comments, there will be eucalyptus trees disturbed by the project, that indicates there is a conflict with the Seal Beach eucalyptus tree preservation ordinance, those mature eucalyptus trees can not be relocated or replaced with non-mature trees so there is a significant impact on that issue alone. He stated that the response to comments acknowledges a very major problem with the traffic analysis but does not fix it, as the response to comments shows the original Negative Declaration which said that VPD, vehicles per day, on the overcrossing was thirty-seven thousand vehicles, in fact the figure is closer to forty- eight thousand, the response acknowledges that but of course does not fix it, it does not go back and redo the analysis that would be affected so you have a situation where the impact analysis is flawed, the benefits are overstated, the additional impacts have not been disclosed, and at a minimum because of that change alone there needs to be recirculation of the Negative Declaration under applicable law, as well, the additional changes from the EQCB require recirculation, it is their position that this can not be done under a Negative Declaration under any circumstances because there is more than a fair argument, which is the legal standard, that there are going to be some significant environmental effects from this project, and in that situation you can not use a Negative Declaration whether it is mitigated or not, you have to do a full blown Environmental Impact Report, and, the fact that the City is trying to rush this through to avoid a Measure M funding deadline, as was heard earlier with respect I I I 10-25-99 I to this project as well as what was reported in the press today, believed to be today with respect to the project, does not override the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and does not allow this City to avoid its responsibilities under that law. One other comment, is that there has not been compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act, NEPA, with respect to this project, which, because of the involvement of federal lands, is another issue that needs to be taken into consideration and, as far as the documentation that he has seen, has not occurred. Mr. Caldwell said on behalf of his clients they would like to join in the comments that have been raised by others with respect to this Mitigated Negative Declaration, it is thought that because of the comments they previously submitted as well as the couple of issues he tried to hit again this evening that this is not an action, if approved by this Council this evening, that will comply with the California Environmental Quality Act, it is thought to be unfortunate, it is known that his clients think it is unfortunate that this is the way these issues are being resolved instead of a more constructive way between the parties that have an interest in the outcome of this, but it is a situation where they find themselves and they are certainly preserving the record with his comments this evening, appreciate the time. Mr. Reg Clewley, Seal Beach, stated his opposition to pushing this item through, it is a detriment to this City, the City will find itself subject of more litigation, the bridge does not need to be widened particularly, the archaeological resources need to be extensively studied, the City is attempting to avoid that under the guise of losing $2.5 million, these funds will not be able to be spent, the City does not have the remainder of funds for the project, and the Bixby project is doubtful as it is subject to referendum. There being no further comments, Mayor Yost declared the public hearing closed. I I Councilman Doane noted that his interests lie with Leisure World, there are many emergency situations, the paramedics evaluate and perform rescue efforts, they do not transport, the ambulance service transports directly to emergency at the Los Alamitos Medical Center, Seal Beach Boulevard is the direct route, and in talking to the ambulance drivers the only place where drivers do not recognize the flashing lights and pull to the side in on that narrow bridge, that is a problem. With regard to the referendum, the proponents are arguing traffic, calling it a traffic problem and urging that the Bixby project be voted down, to vote it down will make the City pay the portion that Bixby would be paying. Councilman Doane said he would support this important widening project, an important project long before the Bixby development proposal. Councilmember Campbell mentioned again the fact that the AFRC was not provided a copy yet the Coastal Commission was, again stating that she felt the AFRC should have been given the controversies. As someone who uses Seal Beach Boulevard regularly, stated that the bridge needs to be widened, it is known how she feels about development, but you can not stifle the major roadways. Councilman Boyd said he would support the Mitigated Negative Declaration because Council has been informed by counsel, the experts, and an outside agency that this meets CEQA requirements, contrary to the opinion of Mr. Caldwell and his clients, it is ironic that his clients, who own a shopping center, that would benefit from the increased ability of Seal Beach residents to travel to that Center and patronize their merchants, would be opposing this project, any potential 10-25-99 conflict can not be seen, and he would support this project. Councilman Snow said he has requested information from the Leisure World Medical Center as to the number of transports to the Los A1amitos Hospital as well paramedic trips in the past three months, he will continue to pursue those numbers, it was also learned that neither the ambulance service or the paramedics transport from Leisure World under Code 3. Mayor I Yost pointed out that Seal Beach Boulevard is at a level of service 'F' now, that not taking into consideration the expansion of Gahna1 Lumber or the addition of Plow Boys in Los A1amitos, and expressed his support for the widening of the bridge. The City Manager stated that staff is of the opinion that there is sufficient information to do a Mitigated Negative Declaration, yet with comments made at this meeting and given the litigious comments of Los Alamitos and communities to the north, using this opportunity to make statements that the City did not respond to certain things, and stated that the City would not fall behind schedule if the hearing were closed and the item held over until the next meeting for responses. The Assistant City Attorney suggested that the hearing remain open so that responses can be made as part of the record at the next meeting. Counci1member Campbell requested that notification be made to the AFRC as well. It was the consensus of the Council to continue the hearing until the next meeting. PUBLIC HEARING - APPEAL - DENIAL OF VARIANCE NUMBER 99-2 - ROOF DECK SUNROOM ENCLOSURE - 1307-1/2 SEAL WAY - ALBERS Mayor Yost declared the public hearing open to consider the appeal of the Planning Commission denial of Variance Number 99-2, a request to permit a one hundred sixty-nine square I foot sunroom enclosure on top of a roof deck that will exceed the height limit at 1307-1/2 Seal way. The City Clerk reported that the notice of the continuance of this hearing had been posted as required, one communication was received this date from Mr. Reg Clewley, copies of which have been provided the Council. The Director of Development Services reported receiving a request from the appellant this date to continue the hearing until November 8th as the appellant would be out of town. Upon the advice of the City Attorney, the City Council, by unanimous consent, accepted the communication from Mr. C1ewley and continued the hearing until the next meeting. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT The Assistant City Attorney said it was his understanding that the City Attorney's firm had been asked to give an opinion and interpretation regarding the exemption of the utility users tax ordinance, the senior citizen exemption in the Code, Section 22-61.1. The question raised was how the eligibility for that exemption was established and on what scale and what time. The interpretation, given by Mr. Barrow and Mr. Weiner, has been that the income qualification and the measuring indicator, the eligibility for tax assistance I from the State are to be compared on comparable years so the totals for the income level for the tax year immediately preceding the current fiscal year, the income level is to be compared against the State established income threshold for that same year. The next time this particular indicator would be looked at would be the start of the next fiscal year for the City which would be July 1st and at that time the income threshold would come into play and it would be compared for the current tax year income to current exemption eligibility, that is set forth in Code Section 22-61.1, an exemption that is at the discretion of the Council, and if 10-25-99 I the Council is of the mindset to further discuss the issue it would be suggested it be put on a future agenda. Mayor Yost asked upon what date then would the senior citizen exemption take effect, to that the Assistant City Attorney stated of question is the increase of the new income comparison level, which would take effect as of the new fiscal year, July 1st, the threshold could be looked at then. Councilman Boyd pointed out that the current threshold is $33,132, the response of legal counsel was that the threshold in effect to determine the exemption today is the threshold that was in effect for the prior tax year which is understood to be less than the $33,000 number. Councilman Boyd noted that there are many people in Leisure World who are waiting for an answer as to why they have not received their utility users tax exemption as yet for which they filed the papers within the last sixty days. The Assistant City Attorney offered that until the start of the next fiscal year the prior income level, the $13,000 number can be used to determine whether someone is eligible for an exemption, then the next fiscal year when people come in with their prior tax year information that would then be compared to the new exemption figure of $33,000. Councilmember Campbell objected, pointing out that those people of incomes over $13,000 but under $33,000 will not see the exemption until next summer. The Attorney said that is their interpretation of the Code section unless it is the desire of the Council to change it. Councilman Doane said he read nothing that made mention of going into effect at the beginning of the fiscal year, this fiscal year started in July of 1999, the fact that three months have transpired does not, in his opinion, nullify the exemption. To that Councilman Snow concurred. Councilmember Campbell objected again, stating that the people have made their application, used the prior years income, now are being told that will not apply until next July, that is not right. Councilman Boyd expressed his objection as well, the intent is to provide tax relief for the people who deserve it, the eleven percent utility tax has become a joke, when it comes to budget cuts the cry is that essential City services are going to be jeopardized, at some point the Council is going to direct that another way be found to deal with that issue, if that is not done then it is going to be by initiative or a legislator is going to propose that utilities are a necessity of life as is food, not taxed, the City will lose in the long run, he would not disagree with legal counsel however would suggest that this Council take heed and be prepared to take some type of action with regard to the exemption. Councilman Doane suggested that this be agendized and changes be made. The Attorney again advised that if the Council wishes to make a change they may do so. Councilman Boyd requested that Council be provided with an accounting of the exact number of applications filed this year, those in tact from the years past, an assigned dollar amount, the effective date of the California Senior Citizen Property Tax Assistance for this year, this information to be in writing from the City Manager. The Mayor mentioned that some information had been projected previously, any report should also include the projected decrease of revenues and how bills are going to be paid in the future. The City Manager said as it stands now a suggestion would be to set this matter for the next agenda, that direction be given to staff to prepare options or an ordinance to enact the exemption sooner than July 1st, 2000, also, he stated that staff had been unprepared for the impact of this issue, this occurred after a news article announced that the new income level, people were lined up, there was no warning, there has been an attempt to process applications as I I 10-25-99 quickly as possible, said there is substantial implications for the City on a permanent basis, there has been no attempt to forestall or find a way around this, merely trying to uphold what the Code provides, the legal opinion was received just hours before the applications were to be turned over to the utility companies, yet the Council does have the authority to change the Code. Councilmember Campbell stated I there is an ethical obligation to the people who are the most financially hard hit, the City needs to work around this. Mayor Yost asked if the City could legally give back tax money that has been paid, the Attorney responded that that is a totally different issue from allowing a tax exemption for certain tax payers provided that there is a public interest in providing that exemption. Councilman Boyd asked when the property tax exemption took effect this year, the Council is presented a budget for approval each year, it is felt to be incumbent that any potential shortfalls of revenue be identified, it is known that in the past the exemption did not identify an amount as significant as today, and in the future it is felt the Council would be much better suited to approve a budget that meets the needs and demands of the City based on the revenues, the anticipated shortfall of somewhere between $100,000 to $300,000 should come of no surprise. The Manager noted that as it stands now the new exemption would not take effect until July 1st of next fiscal year, 2000, there would be no impact on this fiscal year unless the Council were to opt to make changes. It was the consensus of the Council to place this subject matter on the next agenda. CITY MANAGER REPORTS The City Manager reported that the Governor has blue lined I the budget item to remove the concrete debris left from the old bridge in the Alamitos Bay area, however the direction was that CalTrans take care of the problem, there have been discussions with CalTrans as to how to accomplish the project, at this poipt a cooperative agreement is being prepared, their preference ~s that the City manage the project then be reimbursed from CalTrans up to the $50,000 initially requested, the intent is to be prepared to award a bid in December with project commencement in January. Upon preliminary review by OCTA of the request for additional money for the bike trail, it has been learned that that project came out first over all projects submitted in Orange County, now it will just be necessary to work with the Supervisor to assure that all funding remains in place. PUBLIC COMMENTS No Public Comments were presented. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilman Doane complimented the Assistant Planner upon his first presentation to Council. He mentioned that Seal Beach does not have a high school or a hospital, local children are part of the Los Alamitos District, and announced that the Los Alamitos High School Griffins are number one in Orange I County, recently beat Esperanza, he wants to congratulate them and as in the past bring them to be recognized by the Council. Councilmember Campbell announced that that the College Park East Neighborhood Association will be hosting Halloween Haunt on Sunday at Heather Park from 1:00 to 3:00 p.m., costumes, donut eating contest, a treasure chest, pumpkin decoration, etc. She thanked those persons who, every four to six weeks, help with the delivery of her newsletter in College Park East, and read the name of each with appreciation. Councilman Boyd announced, on behalf of 10-25-99 I 11-1-99 I the Recreation Department, the 1999 Haunted House at 310 Ocean Avenue, from 5:00 to 7:00 p.m. on Halloween. He mentioned having received a letter from Mike Ward, Councilmember in the City of Irvine, requesting support to be re-elected to the board of the Orange County Transportation Authority, he a friend and past colleague from the Fire Authority, past Chair, the vote to be taken at the November 4th League meeting. Councilman Boyd expressed appreciation to the Director of Public Works for the $843,000 grant application for the bike trail. Councilman Snow said he hoped that everyone had the opportunity to read a reprint in the October 20 Los Angeles Times of an article from 1938 relating to flood related deaths, unknown to many is the amount of money that has been spent to prepare for a future flood of that nature, at the head of the Santa Ana River there is the Seven Oaks Dam which is to be dedicated on November 18th, the Santa Ana River Flood Protection Agency will hold an important meeting on November 4th, again suggesting that people try to read the reprint of the 1938 article. Mayor Yost announced the passing of Diane Schmidt this date, a valuable member of the community, survived by her three daughters and husband, she will be missed. The City Manager suggested consideration of canceling the November 22nd meeting which has traditionally been done prior to the Thanksgiving holiday. CLOSED SESSION No further Closed Session was held. I ADJOURNMENT It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to adjourn the meeting at 11:00 p.m. Approved: c;) tf ~, ~~hJ 7;;( 4 City Clerk I Attest: I Seal Beach, California November 1, 1999 The City Council of the City of Seal Beach met in special session at 9:02 a.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