Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAAC Min 1996-12-04 CITY OF SEAL BEACH '-' ARCHAEOLOGICAL ADVISORY COMMITIEE MEETING MINUTES DECEMBER 4, 1996 I. CALL TO ORDER Vice-Chairperson Fitzpatrick called the meeting to order at 5:07 P.M. II. ROLL CALL Present: Members Benjamin, Fitzpatrick, Goldberg, Hahn, Johnston, Unatin (5:10 PM), Willey, Young, and Chairperson Frietze (5: 15 PM) Absent: Members Price, Unatin, and Chairperson Frietze ~ Staff Present: Lee Whittenberg, Development Services Director Director Whittenberg said Member Frietze had telephoned to advise she would be late. It would be appropriate, therefore, for Member Fitzpatrick to Chair the meeting at this time. He noted Member Price had telephoned to say she was sick and would not be attending . III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION by Willey; SECOND by Goldberg to approve the Agenda as presented. MOTION CARRIED: 7-0-3 A YES: Members Benjamin, Goldberg, Hahn, Johnston, Willey, Young, and Vice-Chairperson Fitzpatrick NOES: ABSENT: None Members Price, Unatin, and Chairperson Fdetze '-' C:\My Documents\ARCHCOMM\12-04-96.MIN.doc\L W\12-19-96 ~ IV. '-' '- Archaeological Advisory Conunittee Minutes December 4,1996 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Vice-Chairperson Fitzpatrick asked for oral communications from the audience. Member Unatin arrived at 5: 10 P.M. Lillian Valenzuela Robles * 2830 E. 56u1 Way. Lon~ Beach Ms. Robles introduced herself as a Juaneno elder. She has been involved with Puvunga and the Hellman Ranch is a connection to Puvunga. She said the Native Americans walked much more than two miles so there might be cremation ashes at the Hellman Ranch. She expressed concern that the Native American people had not been invited to go to the Hellman Ranch and she asked permission for the Native Americans to be able to go onto the Hellman Ranch and pray. Director Whittenberg suggested Ms. Robles leave her name, address and telephone number with him because he felt there were ways to work with the property owner and their representative to address her concerns. Adrea Stoker * (No Address) Ms. Stoker said she lives in Long Beach and presented the Committee with recently- received information from the Supreme Court of California on the "slap" lawsuit Nancy DeSautels placed against Keith Dixon regarding the Puvunga site. Ms. Stoker said she would object to Nancy DeSautels or Scientific Resources Survey, Inc. (SRS )working on this project. She didn't have copies of her materials for individual Committee members but left the material with staff to copy and distribute. Member Young asked Director Whittenberg if the City was involved with Nancy DeSautels and/or SRS. Director Whittenberg said what various Committee members may have heard was that SRS is employed by the consultant who is preparing the EIR for the Hellman Ranch to prepare the archaeology section of the ErR document. SRS will not be doing any work on the Hellman Ranch itself, they will only be writing a portion of a document about the archaeology. Jan Sampson * (No Address) Ms. Sampson, said she is involved with the Indian community, and stressed she would not like to see Nancy DeSautels work on an Indian site. She said SRS has a very bad reputation in this area. Ms. Sampson has heard that Nancy DeSautels is trying to get involved on the Hellman Ranch site and she felt it would be a very bad idea to have her and/or SRS involved. There were no other persons desiring to address the Committee. 12-04-96.MIN.doc 2 Archaeological Advisory Conunittee Minutes December 4, 1996 '-" Member Frietze arrived at 5: 15 p.m. Mr. Whittenberg indicated she should take over the Chair from Member Fitzpatrick at this point. v. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Receive and File Staff Report re City Council Action to Not Accept "A Research Design and Investigation Program of Archaeological Sites Located on the Hellman Ranch, City of Seal Beach, CA" MOTION by Fitzpatrick; SECOND by Goldberg to approve the Consent Calendar: MOTION CARRIED: 7-0-2-1 AYES: Members Benjamin, Fitzpatrick, Goldberg, Unatin, Willey, and Chairperson Frietze NOES: None ABST AIN: Members Hahn and Johnston ~ ABSENT: Member Price VI. SCHEDULED MATTERS 2. Approval of Minutes of November 6, 1996 MOTION by Benjamin; SECOND by Fitzpatrick to approve the Minutes of November 6, 1996, with a correction at page 3: "forest" not "forrest". MOTION CARRIED: 7-0-2-1 AYES: Members Benjamin, Fitzpatrick, Goldberg, Unatin, Willey, and Chairperson Fdetze NOES: None ABSTAIN: Members Hahn and Johnston ABSENT: Member Price 3. Approval of Minutes of November 12, 1996 '-' 12-04-96.MIN.doc 3 Archaeological Advisory Comnu'ttee Minutes December 4, 1996 ~ MOTION by Goldberg; SECOND by Young to approve the Minutes of November 12, 1996 as presented. MOTION CARRIED: 6-0-3-1 A YES: Members Benjamin, Goldberg, Unatin, Willey, and Chairperson Frietze NOES: None ABSTAIN: Members Fitzpatrick, Hahn, and Johnston ABSENT: Member Pdce 4. Review and Approval of Proposed "Request for Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) for Archaeological Consultant Services" Mr. Whittenberg said at the time the City Council determined not to approve Dr. Stickel's research design, the City Council also requested staff begin the process of selecting new archaeological consultants for the City, and to involve the Committee in that process. ~ Staff began by using the prior SOQ, written three years ago, changing its language slightly. In addition a second phase was added where consultants could propose to do the specific work on the Hellman Ranch property. The purpose of bringing this matter before the Committee is for clarification and input. Ultimately, the City Council will approve an SOQ, which will then be mailed to all the archaeologists on Orange County's list of certified archaeologists. It will also be advertised in a couple of trade publications. Word of mouth should also glean more applicants. In response to a question from Member Hahn, Mr. Whittenberg indicated the Orange County list is an easily identified list of firms/individuals who work in Orange County. Member Hahn wanted to know if and why consultant selection would be limited to Southern California firms. Mr. Whittenberg explained the size of the City's Planning Department (three staff members) would be very difficult to send SOQ materials all over the State of California. Mr. Whittenberg indicated they normally work consultants between Santa Barbara and San Diego. Member Willey asked if Los Angeles County is included in the selection scope. Mr. Whittenberg said staff could attempt to include them but was unsure if L.A. County had a certified list of archaeologists. He further indicated many of the firms certified \..- 12-04-96.MIN.doc 4 Archaeological Advis01Y Conunittee Minutes December 4,1996 '-' by Orange County are not located in Orange County, some are located in Los Angeles, Riverside or San Bernardino County. Member Willey inquired as to the status of the current list of three rotating archaeologists. The Director stated the present consultant contracts expired in May 1996. Member Goldberg asked why the City prefers working with an archaeologist possessing a Master's degree versus not requiring a Ph.D. Mr. Whittenberg said the City Council approved the Archaeology Element of the City's GeneraCPlan and chose the Masters degree qualification as a minimum. If the Committee feel's that provision is to lenient the Committee should forward a recommendation to the Committee to consider an amendment to only allow a person with a Ph.D. to conduct the required studies. He explained the Archaeology Element is not a mandated element of the GeneratPlan , it's an element the City chose to include. Therefore, more discretion is allowed within that element. Member Fitzpatrick said the consultants work in teams and therefore, you have all degrees working on a project. ~ Member Hahn said "I personally would prefer we not use the firm SRS at any phase of the investigation. I read their draft EIR for Bolsa Chica and I had been told by a gentleman who was a monitor on that project that there were twenty some burials. And the draft EIR said that there were no burials. And based on that alone, I don't think that we should consider that firm" . Member Johnston said "This is my own personal opinion. I vehemently oppose using SRS or Nancy Desautels on the Hellman land" . Mr. Whittenberg advised the Committee to focus on the topic of discussion. What's being discussed at this time is the selection of future consultants to work with the City on the Hellman property in particular and on future projects which will be submitted over the next three years. At this point, no determination has been made as to which consultants will do those projects. By reviewing the SOQ, there is no archaeologist that is tied into getting any of this work. Member Johnston reiterated her concern. Mr. Whittenberg explained in detail the City's process for hiring consultants, including the City Council approval of the release of the SOQ, the review and screening of those proposals by the City to an interview list, the scheduling of interviews, and the recommendation of the interview panel to the full Council for consideration as to which firms should be retained for the requested services. SRS would have the right to compete in that process, as would any other firm which determines to submit a proposal. Mr. Whittenberg further indicated he understood the concern and that it would be forwarded to the City Council. '-' 12-04-96. MIN .doc 5 Archaeological Advisory Conunittee Minutes December 4, 1996 '-' In response to a question from Member Unatin, Mr. Whittenberg reviewed the two proposals being requested in the proposed SOQ, one for ongoing services during a three year time period, and the other dealing specifically with the Hellman Ranch project. Member Hahn said she felt Mr. Whittenberg's explanation was confusing because the EIR is underway and the consultant has been selected to perform the historical analysis and that consultant is SRS. "They are being used, whether they're out there digging or not. They are analyzing the material". Mr. Whittenberg said "They will be analyzing written documents and preparing an EIR, a written document". He acknowledged SRS was initially retained by the environmental consultant and the City Council was aware of that at the time. Member Hahn wanted to clarify for the record they are being used right now. '-'- Member Fitzpatrick felt the timelines are very close, considering the holidays, noting the selection process will close on February 10. "He wondered if the City would get an adequate sampling of consultants in the area on such short notice? Mr. Whittenberg explained how the City determines time frames. He noted that from the time staff mails an SOQ until the time responses return, the time frame is usually a two to three weeks. Consulting firms are used to responding in that time frame to this level of information requested. They have off-the-shelf documents which detail their firm, what projects they've done and they include employee and principal's resumes. In addition, they would have to spend a little more time doing their exact proposal for the Hellman project. This time frame is based on the assumption the Committee approves this document tonight, with appropriate modifications if desired, and that the City Council approves it at their next meeting. If this Committee feels the time frame is too tight it can be moved outward. More than the time frame, staff is looking for concurrence with the content of what we're asking people to do. The final evaluation will need to be done by a sub-committee composed of both the Archaeology Advisory Committee and the City Council. This work cannot be done by majority groups, it must be done by minority members of each body. The City Council will determine how many members of this Committee they want to serve in that function. Perhaps they'll say if it's less than a quorum they don't care how many members attend. The sub-committee will evaluate the submitted proposals, conduct the interviews of the short listed firms and make a recommendation back to the City Council as to which firms should be hired by the City. In response to a question from Member Johnston, Mr. Whittenberg indicated when the proposals are evaluated, the City will request a specific number of copies based on the '-' 12-04-96.MIN.doc 6 Archaeological Advis01Y Conunittee Minutes December 4, 1996 '-' number of sub-committee members. The members will then receive their copies and will be asked to review the proposals and reply to the City within a week with their recommendations on the top five to seven firms. Once the City has the members' recommendations it compiles a list and picks, by numerical order of how many firms are listed, the top five to seven firms. The interviews of the firms will take approximately a day. Chairperson Frietze asked if the initial group of archaeologists assigned to the City are no longer available? Mr. Whittenberg indicated that is correct. She asked if there were anyon-going City projects or was everything on hold until February 10, 1997 when this selection process will be completed? Mr. Whittenberg said it would be February lOUt or some time after that. Mr. Whittenberg further indicated the sub- committee would review the proposals and provide staff with their individual preferences of firms to interview, from that staff would compile all the sub-committee preferences and select the most commonly desired firms for the interviews. '-' Member Goldberg asked what would happen if certain archaeologists don't want to work on the Hellman project proposal but do want to work on the rotating list, how would that situation would be handled? Would submitting a proposal for the Hellman project proposal put any firm on a priority list? Mr. Whittenberg replied he thought it would"... almost have to, because the Hellman project is a project that's there and we know it's there and we just can't wait on it forever. So, if for some reason, the subcommittee that's doing the selection process feels that there's a firm that could do the Hellman project, but shouldn't be working generally City-wide in the City over three years, I guess we'll have to cross that bridge when we get to it ... if you think that a firm is qualified to work on the Hellman property, which is probably the most sensitive property in town, I would think they would be qualified to do pretty much anything anyplace else in the City..." . Member Goldberg said she was concerned that someone might want to be on the City's rotating archeologist list but might not want to work on the Hellman proposal and that would eliminate that person totally then. Mr. Whittenberg said it would not totally eliminate that firm because the sub-committee would be looking for two other firms to perform rotating City work. Member Goldberg said she thought this was cluttering the process, that they weren't looking just for good archaeologists but were looking to see who would want to work on the Hellman property. Mr. Whittenberg asked if she would like to see the proposal formatted in such a way that it is sent out only for City-wide services and once that selection is made those firms are invited to present proposals for the Hellman property? Member Hahn said yes, she would like to see it that way. '-' 12-04-96.MIN.doc 7 Archaeological Advis01Y Conuru'ttee Minutes December 4, 1996 '-" Member Hahn asked if the consultant interviews would be open to the public? Mr. Whittenberg said no, it was not an open meeting. It would be the same as interviewing a person for a job on staff. Member Hahn said this would be different because it would be a consultant interview, not an employee interview. Mr. Whittenberg again stated that the interviews would be conducted between the sub-committee and the representatives of the firms. Member Hahn asked if the list of interviewees would be available to the public prior to the meeting? Mr. Whittenberg said yes, the list would be posted at City Hall, by the City Clerk's ~ffice, approximately one week prior to the interviews. Member Benjamin said a good method to find a good archaeologist is to contact the universities, like UCLA. The research directors know a lot of persons they could recommend. Member Willey asked if there was anything which would preclude a previously employed archaeologist from applying? Mr. Whittenberg said no. ........ Member Hahn said that because the Committee was discussing hiring policies, and it is not a law, she was wondering if an exception could be made, because it is of interest to the Native American community and other members of the public, so members of the public could be in the audience to listen to the proceedings? She asked how the other Committee members felt about this proposal? Mr. Whittenberg asked what advantage there would be to that? Member Hahn said the advantage is that the public would know who is applying. If they have concerns, or if they think one firm or person is great, they could bring that to the City's attention. They might want to know what questions were being asked and what responses were made. She felt it would bring in the whole community instead of limiting it to six individuals. Member Willey said she recognized the City's tendency to keep the interviews closed because it is similar to a job interview. But considering the impact which it has on the community and the fact that the people of the community are the ones who elect and install the City Council, it is truly the citizens who do the hiring. She agreed with Member Hahn that given the import to the scientific knowledge of the project, the interviews should be open so that anyone who had opinions, even if they were not allowed to speak during the interviews, would have the ability to observe and make their feelings known eventually. Member Johnston said she agreed with Members Hahn and Willey. She questioned the archaeologists relationship to the City. Mr. Whittenberg explained they would be '-" 12-04-96.MIN.doc 8 Archaeological AdvisOlY COI1U'tu'ttee Minutes December 4,1996 ~ contractors to the City. Member Johnston said they would be using City funds for whatever job they are doing. "I know that a lot of public servants are interviewed on T. V. ...". She agreed it could be an open interview. Mr. Whittenberg said if the open meeting policy is a consensus of the Committee that a motion be made to that effect to the City Council for their consideration Member Goldberg said what was being said about being a public servant and how that works was true but, in the end it's the developer who is going to pay the contractor. She noted the consultant was really not a City employee. Mr. Whittenberg said that technically the consultant is a contractor to the City and their costs are reimbursed by a developer who has an application requiring such services submitted to the City. The contracts between the City and the archaeologist(s) make it very clear that the archaeologist is a contractor to the City, and not an employee of the City. MOTION by Hahn; SECOND by Willey to recommend to the City Council that the interview process for hiring archaeology consultants be open to the public for observation purposes only. MOTION CARRIED: 9-0-1 '-' AYES: Members Benjamin, Fitzpatrick, Goldberg, Hahn, Johnston, Unatin, Willey, Young, and Chairperson Frietze NOES: ABSENT: None Member Price Mr. Whittenberg said Member Goldberg expressed a desire for staff to solicit for the SOQ process City-wide archeology work at this time. Once that process was complete, to solicit for archaeologists to work on the Hellman project proposal. He advised the Committee it would be appropriate to make that recommendation in the form of a Motion if they so desired. MOTION by Goldberg; SECOND by Fitzpatrick to separate the hiring process by interviewing archaeologists to become the City's rotating archaeologist group and to separate the interviews for the work to be done on the HeUman project proposal to another time. Before the vote, Member Hahn asked for clarification on whether this would be two separate hiring processes --- one for Hellman and one for City-wide work? Member Goldberg said that those persons accepted for the rotating archaeological work will submit proposals to perform the Hellman proposal work. "In other words, if five of '-" 12-04-96.MIN.doc 9 Archaeological Advisory Comnu'ttee Minutes December 4, 1996 '-' them, or three of them, are selected then all three can submit a proposal and then the rotating list can start from there". Member Hahn said she agreed as long as the Motion covers that all of the interview processes are public. Chairperson Frietze asked for clarification on the rotation process. She thought a list of six or seven firms was selected and from that list the archaeologists rotate on the City jobs. "The person who's available gets the job. The job goes to the next available person". Mr. Whittenberg explained the City's past practice has been to put the firms in alphabetical order, with "A" getting the first job, followed by "B" et cetera. When the City Council selected their fiscal impact consultants they determined they wanted to use one specific firm to do the work on the Hellman property. "It's not set in concrete that there's only one way to do it. They've gone in both directions". Member Unatin asked if there has been competitive bidding with the way the City has been doing things? Mr. Whittenberg said this is not a competitive bidding process. They don't provide dollar amounts for specific work, they submit qualifications only. The City Council chooses based on their qualification. Member Unatin said the second thing they would submit was a bid for their job on the Hellman property. Mr. Whittenberg explained that based on the current Motion, if approved, that would not happen. ~ Member Willey stated that separating the interview process seemed to her the more logical way to go because of the importance of the Hellman project. It seemed to her most important to find the three best archaeological firms to do the City's work and then worry about who is going to work on Hellman than to tie it. A bias would be created by virtue of tying it together. MOTION CARRIED: 9-0-1 A YES: Members Benjamin, Fitzpatrick, Goldberg, Hahn, Johnston, Unatin, Willey, Young, and Chairperson Frietze NOES: ABSENT: None Member Price After the vote Mr. Whittenberg indicated he wanted to go back to the general proposal for the Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) for the City-wide services. Other than the dates in the document, he asked if the Committee had concerns on that portion of the document? He hoped the Committee would determine that that request format is what they would like to see for that part of the process. '-' 12-04-96.MIN.doc 10 Archaeological Advisory Comnu'ttee Minutes December 4,1996 '-' Member Fitzpatrick said he found it quite acceptable but he wasn't sure on the legal aspects. He thought it was well written. His concern was the split in services referenced on page 8. Mr. Whittenberg said that was in reference to the Hellman Ranch and at this point this Committee is recommending the City Council defer this portion of the document. From pages 8 on, the pages are "dead" material. At this time we are looking at pages 1 through 7. He reminded the Committee that they should forward to the Council their feeling that the time-frame is too tight. Staff has one month from the time the SOQs are mailed until the time the firms respond. '-' Member Fitzpatrick asked if that was enough time to advertise in the professional journals, as that's where most people read about these items? Mr. Whittenberg said staff has two clearinghouses for professional consultant services --- one is in central California and the other is in Redlands or Rialto. They have client lists of approximately 400 consulting firms each. The City automatically sends it to them and they put it on the Internet. Member Fitzpatrick agreed that one month is fine but when factoring in the holidays, not much gets done. Mr. Whittenberg suggested six weeks -- - moving the deadline from December 16th to January 15th? Again, he was looking only at the time frame from when staff mails the proposal out until they submit something back to staff --- this does not include interviews. Member Willey agreed that extending the deadline to the end of January would be more logical given the fact that little or nothing gets done from December 21st to January 2nd. It might be more fair to the firms who wish to submit. Mr. Whittenberg then suggested January 31 st, and pushing all the other dates back two weeks. Member Willey indicated that would be fair. Member Goldberg asked how the subcommittee would be selected? Mr. Whittenberg advised the City Council would decide. Normally, one or two Council members would volunteer and then their representatives on this Committee would serve on the evaluation and interview panel. They may decide to include one or two additional members. Member Hahn asked staff what the names of the two journals or clearing houses were - -- the one in central California and the one in Riverside. Mr. Whittenberg said one is called Hawkins Mark/Tell and he didn't remember the name of the other firm. He said he would get this name for Member Hahn. Member Hahn asked if staff could post the SOQ at the Southern Coastal California Information Center at UCLA at the Fowler Museum? Mr. Whittenberg said yes, if they would allow it. Staff will be happy to look into this option. Member Hahn said that considering the fact the City has an Archaeology Committee, she thought it would be good to get someone with a Ph.D. and academic experience who is good at '-" 12-04-96.MIN.doc 11 Archaeological Advisory Conulu'ttee Minutes December 4, 1996 '-' explaining things --- as well in consulting work. Member Hahn said she would look into this for staff. Member Young said " so we're going to go through all this again --- a research design is going be presented to the Committee, we're going to do the same thing all over again, go through all of our work and it's possible that the City Council and the Major can reject that one too? And then we can do it all over again, right?" Mr. Whittenberg explained that he deals with this issue quite often. He discussed a situation in another City regarding a major difference in opinion between the Planning Commission and the City Council. The City Council makes the final decision and it's not always the one a particular committee likes and he hoped the Committee members understood this is nothing personal. Mr. Whittenberg said this Committee has put in a lot of time and effort. The City Council sees the minutes of these meetings and they realize this effort too. ..... Member Benjamin began discussing the Committee's review of a new research design. Mr. Whittenberg interrupted and noted that the Committee has made a decision not to deal with research designs until they've dealt with selecting new consultants to do City- wide work. Until the Council has said they are ready to proceed with that he thought the Committee would be jumping the gun. He didn't want the Committee to spend a lot of time discussing research designs when we're not going to be talking about it for a couple of months. Member Unatin asked Member Benjamin what he point was anyway? Member Benjamin said because the Committee worked very hard on Gary Stickel's research design and read all the peer reviews, and thought they had addressed everything, she wanted to know where the Committee had failed and what they should look for in a new research design so this would not happen again. The Committee felt this was a good question. Mr. Whittenberg asked to think about this for awhile. Member Goldberg said she thought this Committee had learned a lot and would therefore be a lot tougher when the next research design is submitted. If it doesn't have the correct grammar and punctuation the Committee won't attempt to read it! Member Benjamin said she would like to know what the major objection was to the first design? And Member Unatin said he would like to know if the Council would send the Committee a note? Mr. Whittenberg said traditionally no, other than the fact of making the Committee aware of what their decision was. The Council doesn't give reasons and they don't have to. Sometimes this makes it difficult to know what to do the next time around to meet their concerns. He advised the Committee to do the best job they could the next time around. The Committee told him they did do the best job '-" 12-04-96.MIN.doc 12 ~ Archaeological Advisory Committee Minutes December 4,1996 they could this time. Mr. Whittenberg indicated he understood that. The Chair called for order. Member Willey said she read various interesting articles by Dr. Deutsch at SUNY- Geneso on the political process in small communities which she would be more than pleased to share these as they may be enlightening on small town politics. Mr. Whittenberg said he would like a Motion as to whether this document is acceptable to forward to the City Council with the exception of the dates. Member Willey said it was acceptable with the exception of the dates. '-' Member Goldberg asked Dave Bartlett what the procedure would be from the developer's standpoint? Mr. Bartlett said the applicant's proposal has been submitted to the City for review. They are moving on with the project even though the archaeology part can't be done yet. Mr. Bartlett said the review of the entire proposal with the wetlands restoration is being reviewed by the City and the EIR consultant. Member Goldberg clarified the Hellman project is not totally at a standstill, with Mr. Bartlett indicating they are hopeful this process will wind up at the time the EIR process is wound up --- about five to six months from now. It would be nice to have the research design and most of the test phase completed prior to the Draft EIR. Chairperson Frietze asked if the EIR was is draft form now? Mr. Whittenberg said no, it was being prepared. Chairperson Frietze said she thought Mr. Bartlett had said he was in some processes that are still going on and he was saying that the EIR is in draft form. It is her understanding that as long as it is in that form nothing can be done out there. You can go through the various procedures but you can't get permits until that EIR is done. Mr. Whittenberg said he thought the concern was that as the EIR is being prepared it would be nice to have information from archaeological field work on the site to incorporate into the EIR presentation. Hopefully at that point there would be a way to start talking about mitigation measures specific to certain areas of the property. Mr. Whittenberg requested the Committee to again focus on the SOQ and determine whether to recommend approval, subject to the dates being revised, to the City Council. If no action is taken, the matter would come back to the Committee at a future meeting for consideration. Member Benjamin said the Committee had not discussed money in any manner and she ~ 12-04-96.MIN.doc 13 Archaeological Advisory Committee Minutes December 4,1996 '-" asked if the City could afford the archaeologist they wanted? Mr. Whittenberg said the costs are borne by the applicant. MOTION by Fitzpatrick; SECOND by Willey to recommend to the City Council approval of the SOQ subject to amendments to the deadline dates. MOTION CARRIED: 8-0-1-1 AYES: Members Benjamin, Fitzpatrick, Goldberg, Johnston, Unatin, Willey, Young, and Chairperson Frietze NOES: None ABSTAIN: Member Hahn ABSENT: Member PI'ice VII. COMMITTEE CONCERNS Member Hahn stated she was going to drop off the Committee after the City Council meeting of December 9th and wanted to read her resignation letter into the Record: '-" "Dear Fellow Archaeological Advisory Committee Members: This evening's meeting is probably the last one that I will attend as a member. I have decided to resign from the Committee at the City Council meeting following the one scheduled for December 9th. At the City's request, we Committee members have spent a cumulative total of thousands of hours analyzing and critiquing archaeological surveys, data and reports in order to assist the City Council. In the past six months we have met at least ten times to help the City's archaeologist compile a thorough scientific research design. After all of our hard work, the Major and the City Cot.;ncil rejected the professionally drafted document that our Committee had unanimously endorsed and fired the archaeologist. This action on the Mayor's and City Council's part makes me wonder "What are we here for?" Our very existence as an advisory board composed of professional archaeologists, Native American leaders and regional experts provides a veneer of scientific and multi-cultural credibility to Council actions. When the City Council elects to ignore our recommendations and then fabricates evidence and misrepresents the facts, they are not acting in the best interest of the ~ 12-04-96.MIN.doc 14 Archaeological Advisory Conunittee Minutes December 4, 1996 \... public they were elected to serve. I refuse to serve as a pawn. The Council's proceedings are geared toward serving private development interests above the people and cultural resources of Seal Beach. I have enjoyed working with the other Archeological Committee members and wish you all the best. Sincerely, Moira Hahn" She said if the Committee members had any questions they were free to ask. Mr. Whittenberg said Member Hahn had spent many hours on these issues and while they might not see eye-to-eye on things he has appreciated her work and her concern for the community. He felt she would be missed by this Committee. Member Benjamin said she hoped Member Hahn would reconsider as she is needed on this Committee in many ways. Member Johnston agreed, noting Member Hahn has been an invaluable guide to her. Member Fitzpatrick said he had passed a note across the table and hoped she would reconsider also. Member Hahn said that while she had not lost interest in the issues she wanted to find a way to be most effective. ~ Member Benjamin stated she thinks they feel kind of rejected, and hoped Member Hahn would change her mind. VIII. STAFF CONCERNS Mr. Whittenberg informed the Committee their next regular meeting is February 5th. If the City Council determines to have open-to-the-public interviews, this Committee, as a body, may be meeting sooner in order to do the interviews. He will inform them of this as it unfolds. He wished everyone a Merry Christmas. Member Johnston for clarification on the process now. Mr. Whittenberg indicated the matter will go to the City Council, and he will inform the Committee of those decisions as appropriate. IX. ADJOURNMENT .'-" 12-04-96.MIN.doc 15 ~ Archaeological Advis01Y ConUlu'ttee Minutes December 4, 1996 MOTION by Goldberg; SECOND by Johnston to adjourn the meeting at 6:15 p.m. MOTION CARRIED: 9-0-1 A YES: Members Benjamin, Fitzpatrick, Goldberg, Hahn, Johnston, Unatin, Willey, Young, and Chairperson Frietze NOES: ABSENT: None Member Price -~ -:t~ ~ ~ - Archaeological Advisory Committee '-- ~/~/:f}~~' - ~ berg, Secretary Archaeological Advisory Committee Note: These Minutes are tentative until approved by the Archaeological Advisory Committee. The Archaeological Advisory Committee Minutes of December 4, 1996 were approved on J/'h-./ 8 , 1997. Note: At the Committee Meeting of January 8, 1997, the Committee determined to have a memorandum from Member Hahn relating to the Minutes attached to these minutes. '-' 12-04-96. MIN .doc 16