HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Min 1990-07-23
7-16-90/7-23-90
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
There were no Oral Communications.
ADJOURN
It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council,
to adjourn the meeting at 9:35 p.m.
.1
lerk and ex-of
of Seal Beach
of the
Approved:
~.L- ~.I-
Mayor ProTe
Attest:
Seal Beach, California
July 23, 1990
The City Council of the City of Seal Beach met in regular
session at 7:13 p.m. with Mayor Wilson calling the meeting
to order with the Salute to the Flag.
,I
ROLL CALL
Present:
Mayor Wilson
Councilmembers Forsythe, Hastings, Hunt,
Laszlo
Absent: None
Also present: Mr. Nelson, city Manager
Mr. Barrow, Assistant City Attorney
Mr. Whittenberg, Director of Development
Services
Mr. Jue, Director of Public Works/
City Engineer
Mrs. Yeo, city Clerk
WAIVER OF FULL READING
Forsythe moved, second by Laszlo, 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.
PRESENTATIONS
,I
SEAL BEACH REALTORS - SIGNS
Mr. Jim Klisanin, 7th Street, referred to the recently
adopted sign regulations, and noted the importance to the
real estate industry of placing signs to attract people into
neighborhoods where properties are for sale, a service that
in turn is provided to citizens in need of selling their
property as well as the benefit of increased tax to the
city. He suggested that consideration be given to allowing
7-23-90
I
the placing of real estate signs at least on Saturday and
Sunday possibly between the hours of noon and 6:00 p.m. Ms.
Lynne Markman, Jade Cove Way, submitted a petition signed by
realtors requesting that open house directional signs be
excluded from Ordinance 1302 during daylight hours, and read
a letter from Mr. Rich Johnson, Long Beach Board of
Realtors, requesting that provision be made for some
reasonable use of open house direction signs, referring also
to an agreed upon modification of the Los Angeles sign
ordinance that provided a reasonable exception for real
estate signs. Mayor Wilson and other members of the Council
expressed their concern with the placement of signs on
public property in areas that could possibly pose a
liability to the City. Members of the Council suggested
that placement of signs on public property is a privilege
other businesses do not enjoy, that signs could be placed on
private properties in the general vicinity of the property
for sale rather than on public property, and that the
realtors could develop more finely defined guidelines than
those in the Los Angeles ordinance that the real estate
agents would be required to abide by. The Assistant City
Attorney acknowledged that the City could realize some
liability for incidents occurring on public property
particularly if permission were given to place something on
public property and damages are incurred as a result, and
noted the most common situation is where signs obscure
visibility and traffic or pedestrian accidents occur. He
noted that as discussed previously, the city could make a
determination as to whether a particular location would be
safe for placement of signs within reasonable regulations,
however noted that he did not believe that the signage could
be restricted to real estate. with regard to potential
liabilities, Mr. Klisanin said he felt a free standing sign,
as opposed to a sign fixed to a pole, could pose more of a
hazard, and again cited the need to attract and direct the
public to the available real estate market, noting that the
downtown area poses a somewhat different problem given the
minimum yard area of most properties where signs could be
placed, and acknowledged that there have occasionally been
abuses of signage such as being left overnight, yet noted in
the case of development of more than one piece of property
signs are left for a long period of time. Mr. Klisanin
reiterated their request for an exception to allow real
estate signage to be placed on public property, preferably
on the main thoroughfares. Members of the Council again
indicated a desire to investigate certain areas that could
be designated for such signs,' and possibly develop
regulations to restrict the posting to certain days and
hours, as well as limit on the number of signs. The
Assistant city Attorney acknowledged that some cities have
attempted to eliminate a city's liability through a hold
harmless agreement with realtors however that has not been
successful to any degree, yet it may be possible to pursue a
co-insured status with the realtors if they would be
agreeable. Mr. Klisanin thanked the Council for their time
and requested that there be a follow-up of their concerns.
The City Manager advised that the staff is and will continue
to work with Mr. Rich Johnson of the Long Beach Board of
Realtors towards resolving this issue.
I
I
SEAL BEACH NAVAL WEAPONS STATION
Capt. Stephen Holl introduced himself as the Commanding
Officer of the Naval Weapons Station, Seal Beach, expressed
appreciation for being allowed the opportunity to address
the modernization of the port of Anaheim Bay. He explained
that the Naval Weapons Station was established during World
War II so that the Navy would have an ammunition handling
7-23-90
pier a safe distance from commercial port facilities and
from the general public, that Anaheim Bay was chosen for the
location of that pier and since 1944/45 assumed its ,shape as
it exists today, and has been the only ammunition depot
serving the Navy in Southern California. He stated the Navy
has changed since 1945 and the ships of today are larger,
that the facility has never had the ability to accommodate
battleships or large amphibious ships, therefore ammunition
is loaded onto barges at the pier, transported to the I
explosive anchorage where they are loaded from the barges to
the ships. capt. Holl said the designs for modernization of
Anaheim Bay are intended to enable the Weapons station to
provide piers ide service for ships of the modern Navy, this
proposal having found favorable reception thus far in
washington and it is expected to be proposed to the
Secretary of Defense for inclusion in budgets that are to be
proposed to congress in coming years. He noted that a
modernization plan of 1974 was never funded, as this plan
may not. capt. Holl described, through a slide
presentation, what currently exists at the station and the
modernization plan proposed, noted that the boats from
Huntington Harbour currently put to sea by transiting the
inner and outer harbor past the explosive operations that
take place on a daily basis. He explained that the
modernization proposal is three phases, the first phase,
proposed for 1993, removes the tip of the western
breakwater, removes the easterly breakwater entirely and
reinstalls it enclosing a larger and deeper basin and in the
process attaches it to the western side of the path from the
sea into Huntington Harbour, therefore the water traffic
would no longer enter the inner harbor; the second phase,
proposed for 1994, constructs an ammunition wharf on the
newly located inner breakwater and connects that to the tip I
of the eastern jetty, opening the path to Huntington Harbor
which would then eliminate entering either the inner or
outer harbors, and that the channel from the inner to outer
harbor would be dredged more deeply so that large ships
coming in will not need to coordinate their movements with
the tide so closely; and phase three, proposed for 1995 and
1996 funding, takes the land path from the center of the
station that has been carried out to the end of the eastern
jetty and from it extends a trestle to a wharf set out in
the ocean about a mile from shore and encloses this in a
low, protected breakwater, dredges the channel so that ships
can approach it, with a significant one-time sand dividend
from this dredging. In anticipation of questions, Capt.
Holl stated there would be some affect under certain wind
conditions on the surf on the Navy beach and to a lesser
extent on the Surfs ide Colony beach, yet the arc of the
waves that come into Surfside is still quite broad; that the
project would not fully protect Surfs ide from storms, that
would depend upon the direction of the swells, yet there
would be partial protection; that the project will not mean
that the Station will house considerably more ammunition, it
will remain the same volume; and that there will be no
greater risk to the community as a result of the project,
the amount of ammunition that is stored and handled is
restricted to quantities for whic~ the explosive arc does I
not reach the public. with regard to environmental impact,
the Captain said he would hope the seals will like the jetty
and return to Seal Beach, that they anticipate being
directed to restore some wetlands to compensate for the
displaced water mass in connection with the new jetty, that
there will be an environmental impact study conducted
regarding the modernization which should begin within the
next month or so, that it will be conducted in the context
of a larger plan involving the homeporting of a new class of
ships in various places, that Long Beach is a candidate
homeport, phase three of this proposal supporting that
7-23-90
I
candidacy, and that there will be public hearings during the
EIS process. with regard to whether the City of Seal Beach
or the communities surrounding the Weapons Station have the
right to approve or disapprove these plans, he explained
this is a proposal with local impact, yet it has a national
purpose, therefore the Congress will approve or disapprove
the plan if it is considered in the budget, yet the Station
and the Navy desires the concurrence and approval of the
community, they want the impact to be as positive as
possible, that the strong cooperative relationship the
Station and City have had over the years is valued and hoped
to continue. Capt. Holl said he would welcome a candid
assessment of the plan and suggestions, and that the public
will have an opportunity to express its views and
participate in the environmental impact study process. with
regard to whether the decline in the size of the Navy
obviate the need for expansion of the port, the Captain
explained the answer to be no because the average ship size
is not declining; with regard to cost he reported it to be
approximately $50 million, $50 million, and $100 million for
phases one, two, and three, a cost that is significantly
less than the replacement of any of the major ships which
would benefit from the project, therefore in a national
defense perspective it is probably affordable. He said
there are no Navy ships homeported in Seal Beach, if phase
three is completed there would be an opportunity to homeport
ships however that would require considerable further
investment and there is no plan to do that, therefore
whether there would be more Navy personnel on leave in the
City is doubtful, that there is no Navy housing contemplated
for Seal Beach as there is no place to locate it, with the
exception of the construction itself, there would most
likely be no change to the local job market, the new wharf
allowing more efficient use of the present workforce. The
Captain stated there is a linkage to the ports of Long Beach
and Los Angeles, the 2020 Plan proposing expansion of those
ports, the landfills and bunkering anchorages used by
merchant vessels visiting the ports today, therefore the
port authorities are counting on using the Navy's explosive
anchorage for their bunkering business in the future, that
the explosive anchorage would not be available unless the
large ship ammunition work that is currently being done is
taken care of in some other way, therefore it is possible
that eventually the failure to do this or to find some other
provision for the large ships could constrain the growth of
the ports. The Captain said he felt one will find, if this
plan is in deed carried out, that the Station will continue
to be a quiet neighbor, looking much the same as today, and
concluded that the boats from Huntington Harbour will have a
better and faster route to sea, some additional protection
from some storms at Surfs ide Colony, as well as a one-time
sand dividend that may be significant. To questions posed
by the Council, Captain Holl confirmed that the project will
be federally funded; that there would be some obstruction of
view from Surfside; that liberties of Navy personnel are
unlikely to change from the present as few ships remain in
port at night; and that ammunition would be transported to
and from the new wharf by rail and road facilities.
Councilmember Hastings said the plan in effect makes a deep
water port out of a bay, that she was informed the Concord
facility does not impact a residential area as it does in
Seal Beach, that although the sand would be a benefit to the
City it would likewise provide a means for the Navy to
dispose of its dredging, and of the total cost of the
project she would hope that the City would realize at least
a million dollars to repair and rebuild the groin to aid in
retaining the sand that may be realized. She stated her
I
I
7-23-90
eventual opJ.n10n would be based upon the desires of the
citizens. In response to Councilman Laszlo, the Captain
advised that the environmental studies contract has not yet
been awarded and will not be handled from the Seal Beach
station as the study will be of a much larger context, that
there will eventually be public notice and hearings on this
matter, and offered to notify the City when the choice of I
contractor is made. with regard to impact on the beach and
surf, he stated there is a separate engineering study being
done by the Army Corps of Engineers, that there is a
physical model of the coastline from the east jetty to
approximately Balsa Chica, and that his Station has paid for
a sand transport and wave study, the Army currently
preparing the model to conduct that study, and offered to
make the results available to the city. He noted also that
in recent years Washington has discharged monies for
replenishment of sand usually on a five year basis, and that
the Corps has been studying placing a spur on the eastern
jetty to change the wave pattern and reduce the erosion, and
that they view the modernization plan as part of the answer
to protecting the Surfs ide Colony beach. In response to
Councilman Hunt, the Captain explained that the third phase
of the project would enable taking the ships that are
serviced at the explosive anchorage and bring them pierside
so that exclusive use of the explosive anchorage would not
be needed, and the ports are desirous of using that
anchorage to refuel ships since the anchorage where that is
presently done is part of the four thousand acre landfill,
noting that at the present time ships come piers ide to
pickup and discharqe cargo yet they do not come piers ide at
the container piers to refuel or draw water, they do that at I
anchor inside the San Pedro breakwater, which is where the
ports hope to put more container piers. Capt. Holl offered
that he believed their wetlands mitigation would be
approximate fifty to seventy-five acres. Councilmember
Forsythe said that from a conceptual standpoint she felt
that this plan would adversely affect some areas of Seal
Beach, yet she would prefer to wait until the EIS is
prepared to determine the actual impacts. capt. Holl
confirmed that they would be working with the city on the
EIS, however pointed out that this is a Navy endeavor rather
than the Station, that management will be from Washington,
and noted also that this is only a candidate site. with
regard to sand replenishment, the Captain said he believed
that erosion is much faster down-coast from the jetties yet
periodically some sand is provided for the east beach.
Councilmember Hastings asked for clarification as to where
the bunkering is proposed, noting her concern regarding fuel
spills. The captain responded that the explosive anchorage
is about three miles from the wharf.
Mr. David Skelly, Encinitas, representing the Surfrider
Foundation, said they were a non-profit organization
dedicated to working to and for the protection and
enhancement of the coastline, and stated the Foundation is
strongly opposed to this plan, citing the potential for I
serious problems, coastal erosion being one, as well as
industrialization of the area, and that the Foundation will
pursue any action necessary to stop the plan. Mr. Tom
Quinn, 1013 Electric Avenue, said although there are a
number of factors, a specific issue is that there are many
persons who enjoy the beach and surf of the area, that
presently the Long Beach breakwater blocks much of the north
and westerly swells, Catalina Island obstructs the south and
southwest swells, that the project would cut off the south
swell, and he felt there will be an impact on Surfs ide as
well as the main beach, and an economic impact on the
~
7-23-90
I
business community, and with the presence of the ships their
personnel will come into the city and affect a change on the
atmosphere of the city. Mr. Quinn stated the city is the
custodian of this small, fragile coastline, yet has the
worst quality of sea water in Orange County, and offered
that the project will not improve that quality. He said he
did not support the plan. Mr. Mario Voce, 730 Catalina
Avenue, agreed that any further obstruction of the water
flow will impact the quality of the water, that many of the
ships may be nuclear powered and there would be increased
potential for nuclear materials entering the ocean waters.
He inquired as to the anticipated time frame for the EIS
scoping sessions. The Captain stated it is anticipated
funding will be available for the EIS contractor within
about two months, that the hearing will most likely be
noticed in the press, and offered to provide notice to the
Council. Mr. Roger West, 1201 Electric Avenue, said this is
not the time or place for the proposed plan, that when the
base was established it was small and the community was
sparsely populated, that Seal Beach is not the place for a
nuclear submarine port, and if it is the intent of the Navy
or Congress to pursue this plan, the Council should ask them
to move the base elsewhere. Mr. Gordon Labedz, Regatta Way,
agreed with the previous statement, said that instead of
reducing the nuclear weapons base they are proposing to
increase it as well as the dangers to suburban Orange
County. He spoke regarding the outline of the coastline,
the diminishing sand line, and the effect of a jetty which
takes sand from a northerly beach and deposits it to the
south, and made reference to the Oceanside beach area as an
example. He requested that the Council do everything
possible to deter the Navy from implementing this plan. Ms.
Sheri Medic, Greenpeace Action, suggested that persons
interested in the scoping meetings provide their name and
address to the Captain to receive notice thereof, and that
the EIS likewise be forwarded to those individuals. In
response to questions of Ms. Medic, the Captain responded
that he could neither discuss, confirm or deny the presence
of nuclear weapons on the station or on ships, that
conventional weapons would be transported by truck or rail
from storage on the Station to the end of the pier as
opposed to the present system where the same ammunition
would be transported by truck or rail to the inner pier, be
loaded on a barge and taken by tugboat to the anchorage then
loaded onto the vessel or vise versa if it is an off-load,
, noting there is less handling of ammunition if it can be
done piers ide which is an economic advantage to the Navy and
the nation, and is one of the reasons for the proposal. He
explained that the ships of the Pacific Fleet today in this
area, with the exception of submarines and aircraft
carriers, includes classes from minesweepers to battleships,
Coast Guard vessels, and occasionally a foreign naval
vessel, do not carry cargo ammunition, however there is a
new, much larger ship, that is a less expensive solution to
the cargo ships of today, however this ship will not fit
where the smaller ships will, therefore there is the study
to determine where it can be located, which is part of the
EIS. Ms. Medic said there appears to be a potential for
nuclear weapons on the Station however the public will not
be made aware. with regard to an increased number of ships,
the Captain responded that there would be an increased
capacity to have ships pierside, yet those that do not come
pierside will be serviced at anchor, thus in that sense it
is not an increase in vessels but a simplification of
serving those ships. He said one should keep in mind that
it does appear the Navy is going to shrink, that two small
classes of frigates have been retired in recent years, the
I
I
7-23-90
older guided missile destroyers are reaching the end of
their usefulness, and it is rumored that a large class of
frigates is going to be retired in a financial saving
effort, therefore there could be less ships, however the
size of the vessels will be larger. Mr. James Goodwin, 1405
Crestview Avenue, read a letter from himself and his wife,
which he said expressed the attitude of the Seal Beach I
Nuclear Action Group in opposition to the expansion. The
Captain explained to Mr. Goodwin that the Station has an
emergency structure set up and there are periodic drills in
cooperation with the Seal Beach Police Department. Ms.
Margaret Blair, Linden Avenue, Long Beach, inquired about
the existence of nuclear powered ships, including the new
ship that had been mentioned. The Captain explained that
the cruiser Long Beach is nuclear powered and is an
occasional customer of the station, that the class of ship
that has caused the Navy to consider the expansion will not
be nuclear powered, however the larger pier would allow
aircraft carriers to come to the pier, and they are nuclear
powered. Mr. Harold Collins, 3114 Volk Avenue, Long Beach,
Chairman of Peace Network that is involved in the study of
emergency procedures in the Long Beach Naval station, and
said question has been raised for some time if procedures
are in place and adequate to handle a nuclear explosion. He
spoke of the effect of plutonium, of recent disasters on
naval vessels, and what could have occurred had those taken
place near nuclear weapons, also provided a written document
regarding naval accidents from 1945 to 1988. Mr. Alan
Johnson, 705 Catalina Avenue, objected to the plan on the
basis that phase three would close off the cleaning currents
of this area, which would bring about warmer and less clean I
water, decrease in property values, and revenue to the City
and businesses. Mr. Robert Kendrick, President of the
Surfside Board of Director, reported there was unanimous
opposition to this plan at a recent Surfs ide Shareholders
meeting attended by approximately two hundred twenty of the
two hundred sixty shareholders, and requested that the
Council join with them in opposing the project. He cited
losses to homes in the Surfside area as a result of the
jetties, he objected to the potential decrease of property
values, and expressed concern with the loss of the surf as
it now exists. Mr. Kendrick said if there is concern with
the loss of sand, the jetties should be removed, as well as
the base.
CLOSED SESSION
The Assistant City Attorney announced the Council would meet
in Closed Session pursuant to Government Code Section
54956.9(b.1). The Council adjourned to Closed Session at
9:00 p.m. and reconvened at 9:31 p.m. with Mayor Wilson
calling the meeting to order. The Assistant city Attorney
reported the Council had met in Closed Session pursuant to
the authority previously announced to discuss potential
litigation, and no action was taken.
RESOLUTION NUMBER 3965 - SALARIES/BENEFITS - MANAGEMENT/ I',
CONFIDENTIAL/NON-REPRESENTED
Resolution Number 3965 was presented to Council entitled "A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH,
CALIFORNIA, A CHARTERED CITY, ESTABLISHING A COMPENSATION
PLAN, INCLUDING SALARY AND BENEFITS, FOR MANAGEMENT,
CONFIDENTIAL, AND NON-REPRESENTED EMPLOYEES AND REPEALING,
ON THE EFFECTIVE DATES SPECIFIED, ALL RESOLUTIONS IN
CONFLICT THEREWITH." By unanimous consent, full reading of
Resolution Number 3965 was waived. The City Manager
reviewed the proposed compensation package. Councilman
Laszlo inquired if there has been any change to vacation
,'" . I "
7-23-90
I
allowances and status of medical benefits. The City Manager
responded that there is no changed proposed at this time,
however explained that last year the Council granted an
additional one day administrative leave, bringing management
to three days and confidential and non-represented to one
day per year, that being in recognition of holidays that had
been negotiated for the employee organizations, therefore
all employees, with the one exception of management leave,
receive the same leave package. He noted that in recent
years the orange County Employees Association negotiated to
change from accrual of vacation and sick time as separate
items to a single leave system, which has been carried over
to the management, confidential, and non-represented
categories. Mr. Nelson advised that staff is researching a
medical benefits carrier that will provide an indemnity
insurance program for city employees, noting that at the
present time there are two health maintenance organization
programs for OCEA, management, confidential, and non-
represented employees, and explained that the past two times
the city solicited bids for health insurance the criteria
set forth by the only provider that responded was that they
would only cover the city if seventy-five percent of the
eligible employees selected that coverage, which would have
been about forty-five employees, and that a survey of the
employees showed only eleven were willing to pay the
approximate $300 more per month for the indemnity program.
The city Manager advised that all full-time, regular
employees are receiving full benefits, that there is an
employee who feels that certain benefits have been lost,
however the organization that represented the individual at
that time had negotiated those benefits away.
I
Hunt moved, second by Wilson, to adopt Resolution Number
3965 as presented.
AYES:
NOES:
Forsythe, Hastings, Hunt, Wilson
Laszlo Motion carried
I
RESOLUTION NUMBER 3968 - COMPLETION - PROJECT 608 - ZOETER
SCHOOL - FIRE DOORS
Resolution Number 3968 was presented to Council entitled "A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH,
DECLARING WORK TO BE COMPLETED AS TO PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS FOR PROJECT 3608, INSTALLATION OF FIRE DOORS
AT ZOETER SCHOOL IN ACCORDANCE WITH A CONTRACT ENTERED INTO
BETWEEN COX CONSTRUCTION AND THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH." By
unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution Number 3968
was waived. Laszlo moved, second by Forsythe, to adopt
Resolution Number 3968 as presented. In response to
Councilman Hunt, the City Manager reported revenues from the
daycare facilities are about $24,000 per year, that the
annual capital cost is $130,000, that amount paid from tax
increment, yet does not include some miscellaneous
maintenance items that are funded through the Public Works
budget, that operating revenues are exceeding operating
costs yet does not approach the capital costs, and said he
was not certain of the current appreciation of the original
$1.5 million asset. He noted that the childcare leases,
which are due to expire in approximately two years, provide
an escalation clause and for renewal, however are subject to
approval by the City. The Director of Public Works advised
that no large capital expenditures are anticipated, however
pursuant to a request of the Fire Department there will be a
need to look at the heating system. The city Manager
pointed out that the city had entered into this arrangement
realizing that it would be subsidizing the child care
operation by providing a lower than market rate rental, and
7-23-90
the leases conditioned to provide priority to 'residents and
employees in Seal Beach.
AYES:
NOES:
Forsythe, Hastings, Hunt, Laszlo, Wilson
None Motion carried
In response to councilmember Hastings, staff explained that I
the present heater at the child care buildings is a gas
unit, that the City is currently paying the gas utility, yet
it is believed that the centers pay the electric and
telephone, and again that the Council entered into these
leases with the understanding that there would be a subsidy
of this child care service as there were no other providers
under the current market rates in the downtown area, nor
capable of serving the number of children.
RESOLUTION NUMBER 3969 - COMPLETION - TRUSS REPAIR - MARY
WILSON LIBRARY
Resolution Number 3969 was presented to Council entitled "A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH
DECLARING WORK TO BE COMPLETED AS TO PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS FOR PROJECT #609, TRUSS REPAIR AT MARY WILSON
LIBRARY IN ACCORDANCE WITH A CONTRACT ENTERED INTO BETWEEN
DUKE PACIFIC, INC., AND THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH." By
unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution Number 3969
was waived. Laszlo moved, second by Wilson, to adopt
Resolution Number 3969 as presented.
AYES:
NOES:
Forsythe, Hastings, Hunt, Laszlo, Wilson
None Motion carried
ORDINANCE NUMBER 1311 - CITY COUNCIL COMPENSATION
Ordinance Number 1311 was presented to Council entitled "AN
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA, RELATING TO
COUNCILMANIC SALARIES AND AMENDING THE CODE OF THE CITY OF
SEAL BEACH." By unanimous consent, full reading of
Ordinance Number 1311 was waived. The Assistant City
Attorney stated pursuant to the Government Code Section
referenced in the recent Charter amendment, cities up to and
including thirty-five thousand population can provide for
City Council compensation of any amount up to $300 per
month. Councilman Laszlo moved the introduction of
Ordinance Number 1311, amended to reflect an amount of $300
per month, and that Ordinance Number 1311 be passed to
second reading. Councilmember Hastings seconded the motion.
I
AYES:
NOES:
Forsythe, Hastings, Hunt, Laszlo, Wilson
None Motion carried
CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEMS "G" throuah "M"
Councilmember Forsythe requested Item "H" removed from the
Consent Calendar. Laszlo moved, second by Forsythe, to
approve the recommended action for items on the Consent
Calendar, except Item "H", as presented.
G.
Approved regular demands numbered 80093
through 80290 in the amount of $688,609.46
and payroll demands numbered 40882 through
41106 in the amount of $228,939.03 as
approved by the Finance Committee, and
authorized warrants to be drawn on the
Treasury for same.
I
I. Approved the minutes of the regular adjourned
meeting of May 15, 1990.
7-23-90
J. Accepted the resignation of Mr. Norm
Schutzberger from the civil Service Board
and declared the position to be vacant.
K.
Bids were received until July 19, 1990 at
11:00 a.m. at which time they were publicly
opened by the city Clerk for Project Number 610,
Handicap Restrooms at Marina Community Center,
as follows:
I
Double J Contractors
Archean Pacific corp.
Cox Construction
$43,860.00
48,856.00
54,250.00
Awarded the bid for Project Number 610 to
the low bidder, Double J Contractors, in
the amount of $43,860.00, and authorized
the city Manager to execute the contract on
behalf of the city.
I
L. Received and filed the July 18, 1990 report
from the Finance Director regarding the sale
of the 1990 Tax Revenue Anticipation Note.
M. Received and filed the July 23, 1990 report
from the Director of Development Services
regarding the status of the Air Installation
Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) Study for the
Lo~ Alamitos Armed Forces Reserve Center.
Forsythe, Hastings, Hunt, Laszlo, wilson
None Motion carried
AYES:
NOES:
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
ITEM "H" - MINUTES - MAY 14. 1990
Hunt moved, second by Laszlo, to approve the minutes of the
regular City council meeting of May 14, 1990.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
Hunt, Laszlo, Wilson
None
Forsythe, Hastings
Motion carried
I
CLARIFICATION OF CITY POLICY - BUILDING PERMITS / PLANS
The Director of Development Services presented a report to
clarify the availability to the public of building permit
information and building plans. He explained building
permit information is available to the public as
photocopies, that it has been past practice to allow an
individual to review the various building permits and in
some cases the public has been allowed to make copies
thereof, that actual building plans are not allowed to be
photocopied for persons other than the current owner of the
property in question or the architect or engineer who
prepared the building plans, however building plans may be
reviewed at the Building Department in accordance with
provisions of the Health and Safety Code. The Director
clarified that in the past staff has not released building
plans or copies of building plans in accordance with that
policy, and in the future copies of building permit
information will be made only by staff. Councilmember
Forsythe relayed a suggestion of the Planning Commission
that a record be kept of persons obtaining building permit
information on a particular property. The City Attorney
confirmed that it would be both legal and reasonable for the
City to maintain a list of persons making such requests and
to require identification of the individual. The Director
7-23-90
reported there are between five to eight such requests per
week, generally from the new owner of a property, realtors
who are required to make a disclosure on a particular
property, or from contractors. With the concurrence of the
Council, the Director stated a logging requirement would be
incorporated as part of the Department policy.
HOUSING ELEMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE
The Development Services Director provided a report setting
forth the documents that have been prepared for the
information of the members of the Housing Element Review
Committee, and offered to include any other information the
Council would choose to make available. He noted that
letters have been sent to members of the Committee seeking
dates and times that would be most convenient for them to
meet, and requested clarification as to the level of staff
involvement or non-involvement which is to be provided the
Committee. Discussion followed with members of the Council
expressing their views with regard to scheduling of an
organization meeting, it was suggested that should the need
arise the Council could then direct staff assistance to the
Committee, also discussion with regard to the time frame
under which the Housing Element had been considered and
adopted. Councilman Hunt objected to activating the
Committee until such time as the current litigation is
concluded. Discussion continued. It was the consensus of a
majority of the Council to direct staff to schedule the
organizational meeting of the Housing Element Committee at
the earliest time possible.
AGENDA AMENDED
Laszlo moved, second Forsythe, to consider agenda Item "V",
Hellman Ranch Specific Plan Committee, out of order at this
time.
I
I
AYES:
NOES:
Forsythe, Hastings, Hunt, Laszlo, Wilson
None Motion carried
HELLMAN RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Members of the Council indicated their preferences for the
number of members on the Committee and for appointment at-
large, a question was also posed as to whether having a
citizens committee develop the Specific Plan would be in
keeping with the direction set forth in Resolution Number
3937 and provisions of the Code that calls for initiation,
adoption, or amendment of a Specific Plan by the Department
of Development Services, Planning Commission, city Council,
or the Redevelopment Agency. The Assistant City Attorney
advised that the Resolution and the Code state the Plan
would be City initiated, therefore establishing a committee
would not be inconsistent with those provisions, that the
owners of the Ranch would be invited to participate, as well
as the Mola Corporation, if they are interested. Councilman
Laszlo said it was his understanding that the committee
would work towards developing a plan, and that a report
would then be forthcoming for consideration of the Planning I"
Commission and Council and/or Agency, stating he felt that
the citizens would most likely support some development on
the bluff area, therefore possibly alternatives could be
developed for the areas that are considered to be hazardous,
which may require further action, such as rezoning. The
Assistant city Attorney recalled it was the intent of the
Council to look towards alternative development for the"
Hellman property, and explained that even though a citizens
committee was not specifically mentioned in Resolution 3937
it would be within the discretion of the Council to
establish such committee, and again stated that action would
7-23-90
not be inconsistent with Resolution 3937. Councilmember
Forsythe suggested that consideration be given to following
procedures similar to those used to develop the DWP Specific
Plan. Discussion followed.
I
Councilman Laszlo moved that the Hellman Specific Plan
Advisory Committee be established and consist of at-large
appointments, six members appointed by District Three, three
members appointed by District One, and two members each by
Districts Two, Four and Five. Councilmember Forsythe
seconded the motion. Discussion continued regarding the
representative membership on the committee.
AYES:
NOES:
Forsythe, Hastings, Laszlo
Hunt, Wilson
Motion carried
As announced by a member of the audience, the City Manager
reported that a young man boogieboarding under the pier in
the dark had been severely injured and has been rushed to
the hospital.
It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Council,
to declare a recess at 10:53 p.m. The Council reconvened at
11:01 p.m. with Mayor Wilson calling the meeting to order.
I
REDWINE MANUSCRIPT
Ms. Beverly Casares, Seal Beach, displayed a map of the
Hellman property, which she said was prepared in 1980 by
Archaeological Associates, that site ORA-850 had previously
been identified as a probable site for Gabrielino Indian
bones, and charged that was not addressed by LSA in doing
their research of the Hellman site therefore their work was
without integrity, and that the human bone they discovered
was merely by accident at site ORA-862. She said there were
three prior different cultures on the Hellman land, that
there are thirteen known archaeological sites on the
property, bones found in three, that the 1957/58 research of
Redwine substantiates that existence. Ms. Casares stated
the Pacific Coast Archaeological Society registered the
sites and the artifacts found by Redwine eleven years after
his death, however she claimed that Ms. Beth Padon, a member
of that Society, ten year archaeologist with U.C.L.A., and
head of the Hellman property research, referred to the find
as something Redwine supposedly found. She questioned if
Ms. Padon's statement that the sites were difficult to find
were in reference to the map on display or if she had even
gone to review the Redwine study, and noted that a local
amateur archaeologist was refused permission to view the
documents that are housed at U.C.L.A. She stated also that
Dr. Phil Walker, a forensic anthropologist, had identified
another skull fragment found in 1938 as Gabrielino Indian.
She referred to a recent news article regarding the Coastal
Commission and its guidelines, claiming that a spokesman of
the State Office of Historic Preservation said that their
office had no legal mandate, obligation, or current interest
in reviewing the LSA report, and that a principal of the
Native American Heritage Commission had said they do not
review reports to insure compliance with Coastal Commission
requirements, therefore she stated that obligation lies with
the City. Ms. Casares requested that as a part of the
City's history and heritage, the city Attorney be directed
to subpena from the U.C.L.A. Archeological Information
Center an Archaeological Associates Survey Report of the
Hellman property, Seal Beach," 1980, the Scientific Research
Survey of 1981, and the Landing Hill Manuscript written by
Peter Redwine, an original manuscript owned by Dr. Charles
Rosier, Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History.
I
7-23-90
COMMUNICATION - PROPOSED HELLMAN DEVELOPMENT/GUM GROVE PARK
In lieu of reading the written communication dated June 27,
1990 submitted by Mr. Lee Risner with regard to actions
taken on the proposed Hellman development and the issue of
Gum Grove Park, Laszlo moved, second by Hastings, that the
communication be received and filed.
AYES:
NOES:
Forsythe, Hastings, Laszlo
Hunt, Wilson
Motion carried
I
With regard to the previous request for documents,
Councilman Laszlo moved that the City Attorney be directed
to acquire copies of the referenced reports for the city.
Councilmember Forsythe seconded the motion.
AYES:
NOES:
Forsythe, Hastings, Laszlo
Hunt, Wilson
Motion carried
APPOINTMENTS - BOARDS and COMMISSIONS
citizens ParticiDation Committee
Councilmember Hastings requested the District One
appointment be held over.
Councilmember Forsythe reappointed Mr. John Stillwell to the
Citizens Participation Committee representing District Three
for the full term expiring July, 1994.
Councilman Hunt reappointed Mr. Byford Webb to the Citizens
Participation Committee representing District Five for the
full term expiring July, 1994.
proiect Area committee
councilmember Forsythe reappointed Mr. James Watson as a
business representative to the project Area Committee for
the full term expiring July, 1992.
I
75th Anniversarv Steerina Committee
Councilman Hunt appointed Ms. Pat DOpp to the 75th
Anniversary steering Committee representing District Five.
He noted he did not have an alternate appointee at this
time.
Housina Element Review Committee
Councilman Hunt appointed Ms. Edith Colling to the Housing
Element Committee representing District Five.
Mayor Wilson appointed Mr. Paul Snow as the alternate member
to the Housing Element Review Committee representing
District Two.
Appointment of alternate members from Districts Three, Four,
and Five were held over.
BEACH COMMISSION PROPOSAL
Councilmember Forsythe reported she had spent a number of I
hours on the beach observing first hand the lifeguard
operation, situations they are often confronted with and -
problems they encounter, that subsequently a meeting was
held with the city Manager, Police Chief, Lifeguard Chief
and a lifeguard to discuss various means to assist their
operation. She suggested that a Beach commission be
established to act as a liaison between the Lifeguard
operation and the City Council, however requested that this
matter be postponed until early fall.
Mayor Wilson reported that the City Manager has forwarded a
7-23-90
I
letter to the Coast Guard office in Long Beach regarding the
potentially dangerous conditions in the San Gabriel River
Channel and requesting their attention to the problems,
however a response is yet to be received. She said she had
received a letter from a Mr. Wilmore regarding the same
issue. Councilmember Forsythe said even though the City has
no jurisdiction in the Channel, vessels often end up in
local waters where there is a need for regulations, and
requested a copy of the Coast Guard response when received
I
CITY COUNCIL ITEMS
Mayor Wilson announced that water usage is down eleven to
fourteen percent over a period of two years on a voluntary
basis, and reported that recent graffiti at Edison Park has
been removed. Councilmember Hastings reported six of the
seven businesses that have in-lieu parking have paid their
annual fees with the exception of Hennessy's, and that the
Development Services Department staff has written a letter
to Paul Hennessy informing him of the amount due and that
failure to comply could result in reconsideration of their
variance. She said the conduct of a member of the Council
towards a member of the audience at the July 9th meeting was
unacceptable, and read portions of a Los Angeles Times
editorial regarding the recent Grand Jury investigation,
that alleged the solution to the nepotism issue will be to
relax existing requirements that bar two relatives from
working in the same department only if one is directly
supervising the other or if the City decided that for other
reasons the potential for conflict of interest would be
greater than for two unrelated persons, etc. Councilmember
Hastings said to date the Council has had no information
from staff regarding the charges of the Grand Jury, and read
a letter she had written to the Attorney General and to the
District Attorney requesting an investigation relating to
the Grand July report regarding the Police Department and of
recent citizen allegations. In response to Councilmember
Forsythe, the city Manager stated that even though the
General Plan currently provides that Pacific Coast Highway
shall be no more than four lanes, he believed that the
Council could consider adoption of a resolution, similar to
that adopted by Newport Beach by addressing parallel parking
need, to reenforce the General Plan provision. with regard
to the observatory dome, the Assistant City Attorney said
the direction of Council had been to issue the final permits
for the dome and authorize staff to prepare necessary
amendments to the Code to allow a reasonable amortization
period for the property owner to recover their investment,
and depending upon the period of time specified, the
applicant would then need to come back to the city and
either apply for a permit or remove the dome, and noted that
other cities have determined a period of one to five years
has been felt to be reasonable. Councilmember Forsythe
recalled there were a number of recommendations from the
Retail'Sales Committee that if implemented would improve
Main Street and possibly enhance retail sales tax, lighting
and signage being one suggestion, and inquired if a program
could be initiated to implement some of the recommendations,
possibly a fund raising program or assistance through
community organizations to assist the merchants in that
regard. The City Manager stated that the problem lies with
lack of funds, that a Business Improvement Area was once
proposed yet never adopted, however offered that the staff
could be directed to try to develop a program for Council
consideration. He recalled staff having been requested to
research and prepare a directional sign ordinance for
throughout the City, a project that is yet to be completed,
that an archway sign had been suggested, and that the
I
7-23-90
Business Association had proposed $5,000 for a sound system
for music or announcement of major events, however it was
found that amount was insufficient for such a system.
Councilman Laszlo inquired about the status of the Rossmoor
Center study, and of any discussion of the Mola project at
the last Commission meeting. The Development Services
Director reported several months ago a study was prepared
for the Planning commission regarding retail and non-retail I
uses, however that study was postponed until such time as
there was a full Commission. He said there had been some
discussion by the commission regarding the impact of the
decision on the Mola project in terms of geological concerns
and how that would be carried out consistently throughout
the community, that it appears they are seeking direction
from the Council for the commission and staff to evaluate
the geologic issues. Councilman Laszlo stated he has
received complaints regarding street sweeping on Lampson
Avenue, basically the area between Candleberry and Heather.
Councilman Hunt asked if the amortization approach for the
observatory dome seemed reasonable to Councilmember
Forsythe. She said she had thought that the matter would
simply be required to go through the permit process once
again, however if amortization is the appropriate legal
process, that is what will need to be done. Mayor Wilson
noted that the street adjacent to the Parasol Restaurant is
in need of repair, also that the tours of Leisure World will
again be conducted on July 31st, August 28th, September
25th, and October 25th in conjunction with the 75th
anniversary, and suggested that anyone interested should
make a reservation. Councilmember Hastings inquired if soil
compaction is now being required for new construction. The
Development Services Director explained there may be
different soil conditions from one property to another, one I
requiring compaction where another may not, that the
requirement for soils reports is fairly recent for new
single family homes, and a particular situation could be
dependent upon when the building permits for construction
were issued. Councilmember Forsythe reported a recent
opportunity to tour the Santa Cruz and Watsonville areas and
suggested that any means to prevent the potential for such
destruction in this community should be taken.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Mayor Wilson declared Oral Communications open. Ms. Gail
Ayres, 707 Electric Avenue, made reference to the upcoming
pro volleyball tournament, inquired if the Orange County
Firefighters would be holding their fund raising event, and
stated there have been problems as a result of the
consumption of alcoholic beverages, and inquired as to who
is responsible and who determines a cutoff. She requested
that there be more police patrol on the west side of town
during such events, and offered that there are too many
events in the old town area. The City Manager advised he
was uncertain as to whether the Firefighters would be
holding their event, yet pointed out that they must comply
with the same ABC rules and regulations as any seller. Mr.
Charles Antos, Seal Beach, made reference to the agency for I
which he works where if the work of an employee is not
acceptable they are not given a salary adjustment, and that
he felt there has been adequate concern expressed regarding
the Police Chief, the Grand Jury report, and the City
Manager to defer salary increases pending a final resolution
of the issues. Mr. Galen Ambrose, Seal Beach, submitted a
report from Dr. Stanley Finney critiquing the Leighton and
Associates report on the Hellman property, and requested
that the Council immediately institute the procedure to
rezone the Hellman property as agriculture, wetlands or open
space as a reinforcement of the denial of the Mola project
7-23-90
I
for geologic concerns and preclude any development on that
property. The Assistant City Attorney stated there are
procedures that could be followed to accomplish the request,
the City could adopt a moratorium or instruct the Planning
Commission to process a zoning amendment, however although
there is presently no pending litigation with the Mola
Corporation, in their correspondence to the city Council it
was indicated that if the project were denied they would
likely proceed with litigation, noting that there is a
ninety day statute of limitations for Kola to file an action
against the City, therefore it would be inappropriate to
take such actions at this time. Mr. Ambrose said he felt
the city should take an action now. He suggested that if it
is decided that wetlands restoration is the most appropriate
use of the Hellman Ranch, it must be understood that the
larger the restoration project the more available funding
will be, that there is an opportunity to do a complete
restoration of the Hellman property, possibly tied into Los
Cerritos and the state Lands parcel, and that the state
Lands site would be more appropriately used for wetlands
flooding rather than for a hotel. Mr. Ambrose stated he
felt nothing should be done with the Hellman Ranch until an
acceptable use is determined. Ms. Moira Hahn, Seal Beach,
said she wished the record to reflect that the agencies that
will review the acceptability of the LSA archaeological work
on the Hellman Ranch are the state Office of Historic
Preservation, the appropriate Native American group
designated by the Native American Heritage Commission, and
the Executive Director of the California Coastal Commission.
Ms. Hahn stated she had attended the July 18th Planning
Commission meeting where archaeological concerns had been
listed on the agenda, however a member of the Commission
attempted to block the discussion as being an issue to be
dealt with at the State level, that Dr. Stickle was in
attendance and informed the Commission that other city
governments, including Santa Barbara, feel that the State
guidelines to protect native american archaeological
resources are inadequate, and many cities have developed
local guidelines for the protection of such resources. She
said she had met with the Coastal Commission staff analyst
for the Mola project, provided him with two reports
regarding the LSA archaeological research design, at which
time it was suggested that she forward the reports to the
State Office of Historic Preservation and the Native
American Heritage Commission and that his decision for the
Coastal Commission would be based upon their conclusions,
yet said she had been informed by those two agencies that
they would not review the LSA report for the Coastal
Commission. Ms. Hahn asked that local regulations be
developed to protect the archaeological resources. Mr.
Mario Voce, Catalina Avenue, expressed concern regarding
irrigation of Gum Grove Park and inquired if it is possible
for a member of the community to have access to the fire
hydrants in the area as a watering source. The city Manager
reported he had spoken to the Public Works Director
regarding use of the fire hydrants, that there are concerns
regarding erosion if watering is not done properly, however
personally he could see no problem with individuals watering
through a hose for short periods of time, also that the Fire
Department indicated they do not feel there is a fire hazard
that could not be abated by a brush cleanup and that staff
is attempting to secure a work team to supplement City
employees from either the California Conservation Corps or
the Sheriffs Department to clear the brush and prune lower
limbs of the trees as recommended, and offered that the
staff could provide a full report to Council. councilmember
Forsythe said her concern lies with the health of the trees,
I
I
7-23-90
and although encouraging the abutting properties to keep
their properties watered is a possibility, use of the
hydrants would resolve the immediate problem. Mr. Voce
offered that it has been his experience that fire
organizations tend to clear the brush and limbs up to four
or six feet and are not sensitive to wildlife areas, and
said continued light applications is the proper manner in I
which to water. Ms. Beverly Casares, Seal Beach, suggested
that City crews be directed to connect their hoses to the
hydrants and water the entire Gum Grove Park and to not trim
the trees. She asked that the staff be directed to not
discuss or accept any proposed development plans unless
authorized by the Council, and that the City Attorney be
directed to use subpena power as had been suggested. Ms.
Francis Johnson suggested that only the dead branches be
trimmed from the Gum Grove trees. Mr. Dave Blakeman, 1016
Ocean Avenue, stated he operates a recycling program
available to all residents, and inquired if his proposal to
the city has been given consideration. The city Manager
responded that the Council had been informed that a report
would be forthcoming, and staff is presently attempting to
resolve a legal issue where the refuse contractor is
claiming they have an exclusive collection right.
Laszlo moved, second by Forsythe, to extend the meeting
adjournment time.
AYES:
NOES:
Forsythe, Hastings, Laszlo, Wilson
Hunt Motion carried
Mr. Blakeman, Environmental Recycling Services, read the
recycling proposal he had submitted to the City which, in
summary, proposed voluntary recycling to reduce waste,
reduce need for future legislation to require recycling,
eliminate higher rubbish collection fees as revenues would
be derived from the commodities collected, separate
containers provided for collection of paper and of glass,
aluminum, and plastic, a third container for computer paper,
etc., $10 per container charge, ,single family pick-ups every
third week, weekly or bi-monthly pick-ups for multi-units,
containers collected from yards or designated areas,
emptied, and returned, use of small collection trucks, and a
request that the City not award an exclusive contract. In
response to Council, Mr. Blakeman reported his service is
presently operating in Old Town, the Hill, College Park, and
the Rossmoor community, approximately four hundred
residences, no fees, merely a deposit on the container(s),
confirmed that recyclables are a commodity and recognized as
such, and that his service does not provide rubbish removal.
The City Manager confirmed that Mr. Blakeman presently
complies with the law as he deals directly with individuals.
The Assistant City Attorney reported the refuse contractor
has forwarded a letter to the City claiming to have
exclusive right to perform these services, which is
presently being researched, and offered that if Mr. Blakeman
has something to legally support the distinction between
commodities and waste, that should be submitted to the city.
Ms. Barbara Antoci, Ocean Avenue, said she has managed a
recycling center for approximately twelve years, and offered
that recyclables are a commodity, not refuse or trash, and
spoke in support of this service. Ms. Sue Corbin, Seal
Beach, inquired as to the benefits of Miller Highlife, the
volleyball tournament sponsor, to the City, suggested that
this be the final year of that activity, and charged that
the son of a recent Councilmember was hired into the public
Works Department while she was a member of the Council,
which is a case of nepotism as opposed to the individuals in
I
I
7-23-90/7-25-90
I
the Police Department where they had been employees prior to
their marriage, a situation similar to Black versus Seal
Beach some years past where the judge dismissed the charge
of nepotism. Ms. Dorothy Whyte, Chairman of the 75th
Anniversary Committee, expressed appreciation to the Council
for funding their efforts and noted the Committee's intent
to reimburse those monies to the city. She reported a
masquerade party is planned at the Bixby Office Park for
October 26th and if it appears there will be more than the
four hundred attendees the Committee will look into
obtaining an additional tent, that October 27th festivities
will include a 10K run, a parade, a program will be on the
greenbelt and possibly an evening fireworks display. She
added that there will be Anniversary banners on the main
City streets, that tee shirts, posters and buttons are for
sale, that the Chamber will be hosting a golf tournament on
September 13th, there will be a Naval Weapons station open
house on October 15th, and reported that sponsors for the
various activities are being sought. She explained that
holding a 'pow-wow' is not considered to be feasible for
various legal reasons, however the Committee is looking
towards including the Indians in the parade or activities on
the greenbelt. Ms. Whyte commended the members of the
Committee for their cooperation and efforts towards the 75th
Anniversary celebration. There being no further comments,
Mayor Wilson declared Oral Communications Closed.
ADJOURNMENT
Laszlo moved, second by Hunt, to adjourn the meeting until
Wednesday, July 25th at 1:00 p.m; to meet in Closed Session.
I
AYES:
NOES:
Forsythe, Hastings, Hunt, Laszlo, Wilson
None Motion carried
The meeting adjourned at 12:51 a.m.
Approved:
~~~~
Ma or
Attest:
I
Seal Beach, California
July 25, 1990
The City Council of the City of Seal Beach met in regular
adjourned session at 1:01 p.m. with Mayor Wilson calling the
meeting to order with the Salute to the Flag.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Mayor Wilson
Councilmembers Forsythe, Hastings, Hunt,
Laszlo