Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Min 1994-02-28 ,1 I I ./J\.:J..ij 2-28-94 Seal Beach, California February 28, 1994 The regular adjourned session scheduled for 6:00 p.m. was postponed until 6:30 p.m. The City Council of the City of Seal Beach met in regular adjourned session at 6:30 p.m. with Mayor Forsythe calling the meeting to order with the Salute to the Flag. ROLL ClIo T.T. Present: Mayor Forsythe Councilmembers Brown, Doane, Hastings, Laszlo Absent: None Also present: Mr. Bankston, City Manager Mr. Barrow, city Attorney Mrs. Yeo, City Clerk CLOSED SESSION The City Attorney announced that the city Council would meet in Closed Session pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 to discuss pending litigation in the Stark versus city of Seal Beach matter. It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to adjourn to Closed Session at 6:32 p.m. The Council reconvened at 6:47 p.m. with Mayor Forsythe calling the meeting to order. The City Attorney reported the Council met in Closed Session to discuss the matter previously announced and that the City Attorney reported the status of the case. ADJOURNMENT It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to adjourn the meeting at 6:48 p.m. Clerk and ex-o of Seal Beach of the Approved: _ ~UAo / a:{" ",)_L I. Mayor Att.... 9,~lZh~fe Seal Beach, California February 28, 1994 The City Council of the City of Seal Beach met in regular session at 7:00 o'clock p.m. with Mayor Forsythe calling the meeting to order with the Salute to the Flag. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Forsythe councilmembers Brown, Doane, Hastings, Laszlo Absent: None 2-28-94 Also present: Mr. Bankston, city Manager Mr. Barrow, City Attorney Mr. Whittenberg, Director of Development Services Mrs. Yeo, City Clerk WAIVER OF FULL READING I' Hastings moved, second by Brown, to waive 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. AYES: NOES: Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Hastings, Laszlo None Motion carried PRESENTATION Mayor Forsythe proclaimed March, 1994 as "Red Cross Month" and encouraged all citizens to volunteer and support the Orange County Red Cross in its many community service endeavors. As a volunteer representative of the American Red Cross, Mr. Addeman accepted the Proclamation with appreciation. Mr. Addeman noted that the Congress of the United States granted a charter to the American Red Cross in 1901, the organization continues to receive no governmental funding, is totally supported by volunteer donations whether that be money, time, or blood, is available to respond twenty-four hours a day in the event of emergency situations, as well as offering a variety of life- saving and educational classes and programs. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 1_ Mayor Forsythe declared Oral Communications open. Mr. Gordon Shanks, 215 Surf Place, brought to attention a campaign flier of a District One Council candidate that included a picture with the Police Chief and an officer, to which he said question has been raised if this is a formal endorsement by the Police Department or the Chief of that candidate, and it was his understanding at one time there had been a restriction of city employees endorsing political candidates. The City Manager acknowledged having seen the flier, explained that the photo had been taken at an occasion of the donation of bicycles to the Police Department by the Lions Club, permission to use the photo was not sought, it is not an endorsement, and the City does maintain a policy relative to individual employees endorsing candidates or being involved in campaigns, however noted that the employee unions have the right to endorse if they choose to do so. The Manager reiterated that the Chief did not authorize the use of the picture nor has he made any endorsement, and it is understood that from a legal standpoint permission is not required to use the photo. Mr. Shanks inquired if a news release has been submitted declaring that the photo is not an endorsement of this candidate or if the candidate has been asked to cease distribution of the flier. The City Attorney confirmed there is nothing to prohibit the use of such photos in campaign brochures, the City Manager having confirmed that there is no endorsement is sufficient for the purpose of the city, and said I he was not aware of any law being broken by the use of the photograph. Mr. Shanks expressed his opinion that it should be incumbent upon the Chief to prepare a written clarification of the facts in this instance. Mr. Charles Antos, 328 - 17th Street, made reference to provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, specifically permitted uses in the public land use zone and Ruby'S Diner, a concession on the publicly owned pier. He said it appeared from the last Planning Commission meeting that that body will be making final decisions on the application for improvements submitted by Ruby's, thereafter any modifications to the applicable agreements will come before the City Council. I I I ", 2-28-94 Recalling the deliberations that took place relating to the reconstruction of the pier and restaurant, selection of the restaurant operator, who he said agreed to operate within the confines of the restaurant footprint, Mr. Antos again mentioned the application to now expand the restaurant to encompass most of the end of the pier, to which he stated the purpose of the pier is for public use, fishing, walking, etc., not exclusive use by one restaurant. Mr. Antos suggested that this application be considered by the Council prior to final approvals. The City Manager explained that the building housing the restaurant is owned by the City, any modification to that structure would require a lease amendment to be considered and acted upon by the Council whether or not there is approval or denial of the CUP or appeal thereof. He noted that Fish and Game and Coastal Commission review of the application submitted to the City by the tenant was sought by staff however those agencies declined to review the tenant proposal except if submitted as an owner application seeking review, that being the extent of the action that was sought. The Manager reported that comments have been received from one of the agencies, based upon the application for a CUP, however comments from the Coastal Commission will not be forthcoming until a City council action to authorize that an application be submitted. He pointed out that even though the Conditional Use Permit was presented to the Planning Commission that did not constitute a final action inasmuch as the City is the property owner, the Council would review the lease terms I modifications as such, and consider making an application to the Coastal Commission in order to solicit their comments. Recalling past determinations that the Hellman property is to dangerous to build upon, Mr. Galen Ambrose, Seal Beach, inquired if the continuing legal action of Mola would deter rezoning of the Hellman land. The city Manager reported an appeal by Mola to the appellate court remains, and it is uncertain whether that would have a bearing on any rezone proposal, however noted there has been some consideration of a Specific Plan for the Hellman land, discussions with the Coastal Conservancy on wetlands restoration and some support and assistance in developing a Wetlands Element, of which the Hellman Trust is supportive. The City Attorney reported that the most recent legal counsel for Mola has filed for a ninety day extension with the Court of Appeal to submit their opening brief, however the determination of the Court has not been received as yet. The Attorney confirmed that it would be necessary, or strongly recommended, that an environmental study be conducted in conjunction with the preparation of a Specific Plan for the Hellman land. Mr. Ambrose suggested an interim zoning on the Hellman property, possibly agriculture or oil extraction use, especially in view of the potential for an earthquake, and the lack of desire for another development proposal for that property. There being no further comments, Mayor Forsythe declared Oral Communications closed. CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEMS "E" thru "K" Councilman Laszlo requested Items "E" and "J" be removed from the Consent Calendar. Hastings moved, second by Doane, to approve the recommended action for items on the Consent Calendar, except Items "E" and "J", as presented. B. Approved regular demands numbered 4564 through 4675 in the amount of $160,578.21 and payroll demands numbered 5440 through 5619 in the amount of $290,319.43 as approved by the Finance Committee, and authorized warrants to be drawn on the Treasury for same. 2-28-94 C. Denied the claim for damages of Mary Jane Cassara and referred same to the city's liability attorney and adjuster. D. Received and filed the Monthly Investment Report as of January 31, 1994. F. I Approved the minutes of the February 14, 1994 reqular adjourned and reqular meetings. G. Bids were received until 2:00 p.m., February 7, 1994 for one (1) Deluxe 4 x 4 Extra Cab Truck, two (2) Mini- Trucks, and one (1) one-ton Cab and Chassis Truck with Harbor Truck Body, at which time they were publicly opened by the City Clerk as follows: Two Mini-Trucks Huntington Beach Dodge Cabe Bros. Toyota Cerritos Dodge One 1-ton Stake Bed PickuD $20,470.35 20,713.86 23,240.21 Tuttle-Click Ford Huntington Beach Dodge cerritos Dodge $21,367.40 26,289.93 28,190.63 Huntington Beach Dodge Cabe Bros. Toyota Cerritos Dodge $17,885.43 18,876.72 19,406.62 I One 4 x 4 Extra Cab Truck Awarded the bid for two Mini-Trucks to the low bidder, Huntington Beach Dodge, in the amount of $20,470.35, awarded the bid for the one-ton Stake Bed Pickup to Tuttle- Click Ford in the amount of $21,367.40, and rejected the three bids for the 4 x'4 Extra Cab Truck due to an error in the bid specifications. H. Proclaimed the week of February 23, 1994 as "Waste Awareness Week." I. As of January 24, 1994 five bids were received in response to a Request for Proposals to conduct a fixed asset inventory and appraisal from: The Valuation Advisory Group, Inc. Valuation Resource Management, Inc. Industrial Appraisal Company American Appraisal Data Solutions/Noordeen Arooz Shariff Upon evaluation of the bids by city staff and the City's auditor, Diehl, Evans & Company, the bid was awarded to Valuation Resource Management, Incorporated, to conduct the Fixed Asset Inventory, Appraisal and Management System, as recommended. I I I I j~' I \ 2-28-94 x. Bids were received for project Number 633, Repair of the Fire Damaged pier, until 11:00 a.m., September 27, 1993, at whiCh time the bids were publicly opened by the City Clerk as follows: Pacific Enterprises/Cox Construction (a joint venture) John L. Meek Construction Manson Construction & Engineering Company Connolly-Pacific Company Contractors $188,700 199,946 232,000 250,340 Awarded the bid for Repair of the Fire Damaged Pier, Project Number 633, to the lowest responsible bidder, Pacific Enterprises/Cox Construction, in the amount of $188,700 and authorized the City Manager to execute the contract on behalf of the city. AYES: NOES: Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Hastings, Laszlo None Motion carried ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM "E" - ORDINANCE NUMBER 1382 - BEACH COMMISSION The city Manager clarified that Ordinance Number 1382 entitled "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA, RESCINDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 1313" disbands the Beach commission. ITEM "JII - FEDERAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN - AIR OUALITY As a point of information, Councilman Laszlo described some of the expanded future regulations relating to emission control standards for the registration of out of state vehicles; a required Choice for employees of cash payment or transit vouchers in lieu of an employer's leased parking space where there are twenty-five or more employees of a business; boat motors to require smog devices; possibly lawn mower smog devices, etc. Brown moved, second by Laszlo, to waive full reading and adopt Ordinance Number 1382, and to receive and file the Federal Implementation Plan for Air Quality, request staff to monitor the FIP development process and provide additional information to the City Council as deemed appropriate, also to forward the staff report to the Environmental Quality Control Board and Planning Commission for information purposes. AYES: NOES: Brown, Doane, Forsythe, Hastings, Laszlo None Motion carried CITY MANAGER REPORTS There were no City Manager reports. COUNCIL CONCERNS Councilman Doane called attention to a recent seminar hosted by the Leisure World Democratic Club on the subject of crime, and recommended that the candidates and all residents view this valuable program when it is aired on the local channel three. Councilman Brown reminded staff of the Rossmoor Theater parking issue. The Director of Development Services noted that parking and landscaping plans have been submitted to the City as previously reported by the City Manager, those plans are being reviewed, at this point it appears the design would allow for more control of the areas behind the theater, and should there 2-28-94 be need of further control, would allow for the installation of gates. He confirmed that additional security has been employed for the area, and it is felt that the security along with the landscaping will satisfy the concerns of the neighboring residents. Councilman Laszlo reported receiving a number of complaints regarding the size of the new refuse and recycling containers, his understanding was that a sixty-six gallon I container could be requested, and inquired if a thirty-three gallon bin would also be available. The City Manager suggested that when a sixty-six gallon replacement bin is requested from the refuse contractor, replacement estimated at about three weeks, inquiry can also be made as to the availability of a thirty-three gallon container. Councilman Laszlo requested clarification of statements made by the contractor's staff that the city rather than the refuse contractor is the recipient of the additional $8 charge for a second refuse collection bin. The City Manager explained that the refuse rates require approval by the City, the additional $8 charge does not come to the City, however the City does realize an approximate $.23 administrative fee, the billing includes a charge for the County gate fee, the balance of the charges go to the hauler. Mayor Forsythe cited greenwaste as a problem in the future, and inquired if a program for that type of refuse is being considered. The City Manager recalled the desire of the Council to simultaneously implement a greenwaste program however noted the County landfill does not as yet have the capability to treat greenwaste, therefore will need to be included with the regular refuse at this point in time, yet special pickups, additional containers of smaller capacity are also being considered as solutions. With reference to the size of the refuse containers, Councilman Laszlo announced in jest the first annual College Park East refuse container chariot races on July 4th at College I Park. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Mayor Forsythe declared Oral Communications open. Mr. Gordon Shanks, 215 Surf Place, made reference to Ruby's application for expansion and a recent Planning Commission discussion of same, thereafter a visit was made to the specific location on the pier by a representative from Fish and Game, a representative of Ruby's, and City staff, and questioned what constitutes a conflict of interest when voting on such an application inasmuch as the attorney in attendance at the commission meeting advised that neither the Commission or Council members should be present at the visit as they would then jeopardize their ability to vote on the matter. The City Attorney advised that the rules are somewhat different for the Planning commission and the City Council, the Commission acts on quasi-judicial matters such as CUP's, variances, subdivision maps, etc., the Council acts on some quasi-judicial matters as well as quasi-legislative matters. He stated the Council could have attended the visitation of the site pursuant to a quasi-legislative consideration, however with regard to the Commission, although there may not be a conflict of interest, a presumption of bias is raised, likened to acting in the capacity of a judge and obtaining evidence outside the record, therefore in the case of I a Commissioner attending, the advice would be that there be no discussion, that few questions be asked and no opinions be given, and upon returning to the hearing on the matter all discussion, questions, etc. should be reported to become a part of the official record. In the case of Ruby's the Council would need to approve the lease, allowing concessions/businesses on pUblic property, those being legislative decisions, the Commission having a restricted role in considering the land use of the site. He confirmed that the Assistant city Attorney had advised the Commission that in this case they should not visit the site or participate in the meeting outside of the record I I I :'~~~ 2-28-94 whereby it could be viewed as a violation of due process by the applicant. Mr. Shanks said it was his understanding that the Assistant Attorney recommended that the Council not attend the meeting as well, and to that he asked if the Council could have selected a representative to attend, citing the scenario that Ruby's had the opportunity for input however the same opportunity was not available to the city's elected representatives or designee. The Attorney explained that Fish and Game were present to provide input to the Commission, and the concern lies with the quasi-judicial Commission hearing. Councilmember Hastings offered her opinion that the public representative of the Commission that attended the meeting should have been allowed to ask questions/make inquiries for the purpose of clarity. She then questioned the past attendance of the Council at the meetings relating to Bixby. The city Attorney advised that Bixby is not a quasi-judicial application, rather involves legislative decisions for a zone change and General Plan amendment, and being such the Council would not be prohibited from attending related meetings, zoning issues traditionally a legislative/ policy decision which, thus far, the courts have upheld. Mr. Shanks mentioned his preference that neither the citizen representative or that of Ruby's should have been allowed to make comments at the visitation, rather just Fish and Game and City staff. The City Attorney again emphasized that it is the Planning Commission that will make the quasi-judicial decision, not Fish and Game, that agency merely making their feelings known to the Commission, thus the concern with a perception of bias. Mayor Forsythe added her belief that the concern stemmed from Ruby'S having the only opportunity for input to Fish and Game, thus a perception of biased input. Mr. Charles Antos, 328 - 17th Street, noted that the City had received monies from the state for the rebuilding of the pier, conditioned to be open to the public and available for fishing, and suggested that staff review the documents relating thereto. He stated his opinion that this matter should have first come before the Council for a determination, given the public ownership, as to whether or not there should be an expansion on the pier. Councilman LasZlo spoke in support of this matter having been heard by the Planning Commission prior to consideration by the Council. The City Manager confirmed that the Conditional Use Permit denial by the Planning Commission has been appealed by Ruby's, and explained again that the City is the property owner and if there is to be an application, it is at the property owner's discretion. The Manager explained further that when Ruby's submitted their proposal to the City it was his intent to get input from Wildlife and the Coastal Commission prior to this matter coming to the Council so that this body would have the benefit of the comments and concerns of those two agencies, as is consistent with the lease and consistent with State law, that being approximately nine weeks ago, however neither body would respond unless there was a formal application, therefore a decision was made solely on the basis of process and procedure, as could best be judged at that time, to formalize an application by authorizing the submittal of the tenants proposal in order to gain Wildlife and Coastal Commission comments, again, so that those comments could be provided the Council along with any of the actions and recommendations of the Planning Commission on the Conditional Use Permit. He clarified that when he said this matter may not come before the Council, the City Manager, under the authorities granted at that level, is the one that signed, for the benefit of the property owner, in order to garner the comments of those two agencies, one response has been extremely misconstrued, the other agency has yet to comment. He added that it is his intent, even though there has not been an opportunity to provide an explanation to Ruby's as yet, to withdraw the property owner's permission for the application, then come to the Council 2-28-94 as the property owner to seek a determination as to whether or not the Council has an interest in any modification to the building, that decision based upon the input that came out of the Planning Commission level, which is the pUblic hearing process and source of information to the Council and Commission. He noted that the prior practice of on-site visits and observances has been the source of past complaints, that I practice is now being avoided. He pointed out as well that - since there is a lease, staff did not want to enter into negotiations in that regard and have it construed that there was pressure placed upon the issue of the proper expansion as a deliberate influence to the contract negotiations, therefore the decision to go before the Planning Commission first for the adequacy or appropriateness of the use, and then to the council regarding the lease. Councilman Laszlo inquired as to a time frame for the pier repairs. The City Manager responded that the contract has been awarded, the contractor has had contact with his suppliers, the commencement date is yet uncertain however the work is expected to be completed by the first of June. Mr. Galen Ambrose, Seal Beach, questioned what is being planned as a deterrence to crime at the local level. He cited the lack of punishment by the courts as promoting more crime, suggested that future plans for the city should take into consideration the issue of crime, and pointed to the Supersaver Cinema as an example that appears to have increased crime, has not significantly increased revenues, the alcohol establishments on Main Street as another example. There being no further comments, Mayor Forsythe declared Oral Communications closed. CLOSED SESSION The City Attorney announced that the Council would meet in Closed Session pursuant to Government Code Sectio~ 54956.9 to I discuss pending litigation in the Stark versus Seal Beach case. It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to adjourn to Closed Session at 8:11 p.m. The Council reconvened at 8:37 p.m. with Mayor Forsythe calling the meeting to order. The City Attorney reported the Council had discussed the item previously announced and the City Council gave direction to the City Attorney. ADJOURNMENT It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council, to adjourn the meeting until March 14th, 1994 at 6:00 p.m. to meet in Closed Session. The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 8:39 p.m. Clerk and ex-off1C10 of Seal Beach of the Approved: I Attest: " h