Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Min 1988-05-02 5-2-88 Seal Beach, California May 2, 1988 The City Council of the City session at 7:00 p.m. with Mayor to order with the Salute to the of Seal Wilson Flag. Beach met in regular calling the meeting ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Wilson Councilmembers Clift, Hunt I Absent: Councilmembers Grgas, Risner By unanimous consent of the Council, Mrs. Risner's absence from the meeting was excused. Councilman Grgas arrived at the meeting at 7:14 p.m. Also present: Mr. Nelson, City Manager Mr. Stepanicich, City Attorney Mr. Joseph, Assistant City Manager Mr. Knight, Director of Development Services Mr. Jue, Director of Public Works/ City Engineer Chief Dorsey, Lifeguard Department Ms. King, Administrative Aide/Engineering Mrs. Yeo, City Clerk WAIVER OF FULL READING Clift moved, second by Hunt, 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 I Councilmembers after reading of the title unless specific request is made at that time for the reading of such ordinance or resolution. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Clift, Hunt, Wilson None Grgas, Risner Motion carried PRESENTATION - EMPLOYEE OF THE YEAR The City Manager announced and introduced the Employee of the Year, Ms. Ginger Bennington, Secretary to the City Manager. Ms. Bennington expressed appreciation for the honor. PROCLAMATIONS Mayor Wilson proclaimed the "Independent Living Month." month of May, 1988 as Mayor Wilson proclaimed Service Recognition Day." proclamation on behalf of with appreciation. Saturday, May 14, 1988 as RFire Chief Dave Wilson accepted the the Orange County Fire Department PUBLIC HEARING - STREET LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 1- I FISCAL YEAR 1988/89 Mayor Wilson declared the public hearing open to consider establishing a Street Lighting Assessment District. The City Clerk certified that the notice of public hearing had been advertised and mailed to each property owner as required by law, and reported that until this hour a total of sixty-three written communications had been received, one in support of the Assessment District, one protest withdrawn, and sixty-one communications in opposition to formation of the District. The City Manager stated that this item relates directly to the proposed 1988/89 budget which was submitted to the Council by this agenda, reporting 5-2-88 I that the City is in the position of declining population and a fixed tax base while the cost of providing services is increasing, therefore in upcoming years it will be difficult to match revenues with the service demands of the community unless the demand for service, thus the cost thereof, is reduced or other revenues are identified, such as establishing a policy of full cost recovery. He noted that costs are currently increasing by a rate of 4.2 percent per year while revenues are only increasing 3.9 percent. Councilman Grgas arrived at 7:14 p.m. The City Engineer presented the staff report, explaining that the total assessment is a combination of the special and direct special benefit, the operation and maintenance of arterial lights which provide a special benefit to all assessable parcels whether or not such parcels are in close proximity to such lights, and the operation and maintenance of street lights in close proximity to certain lots and parcels which provides a direct special benefit received by such lots or parcels. He added that the amount of each category of benefit varies depending on the type of dwelling, single family or multiple unit, and that non- residential parcels are assessed a special benefit based on square footage and a direct special benefit based on front footage. Mr. Jue reported the total proposed assessment is $207,000, $180,000 for lighting costs and $27,000 for administrative costs and a one-time district formation cost. I Mayor Wilson invited members of the audience wishing to speak to this item to come to the microphone and state their name and address for the record. Mr. Bruce Stark, 204 Ocean Avenue, stated his opposition to the Assessment District for the reason that the assessment would relieve the General Fund and allow those monies to be used for other purposes. Mr. Stark compared the budget for Seal Beach with those of other communities, referred to Quimby Act monies that had been returned to property owners, and suggested the City should economize. Mr. Ken Radcliff, 4880 Hazelnut Avenue, stated there is money in the City's budget to pay the cost of street lighting, whether it be from salaries or another source, expressing his feeling that once established the Assessment District will be permanent, and that it is a means of getting around Proposition 13. Mr. Walter Lands, 4580 Ironwood Avenue, noted this to be the tenth anniversary of Proposition 13 and that California residents were warned about the imposition of such fees and assessments. He stated his objection was not necessarily the dollar amount of the assessment but that it will allow further assessments to be made, and questioned the higher charge to College Park East and West residents. Mr. Lands claimed that College Park East streets have not been repaired, and stated that if funds are needed for police vehicles, etc., the citizens should be advised of that specific need for funds. Councilman Clift explained the formula used in establishing the assessments, noting the basis is the degree of benefit derived from such street lighting, and pointed out that there are approximately one-half the number of street lights in the downtown area as there are in College Park East, COllege Park West, and on the Hill, thus the difference in assessment. Mr. Wayne Astin, 13650 Del Monte Drive, spoke in support of Proposition 13 and the requirement that new taxes be placed to a vote. Mr. Walter Sczawinski, 1005 Fathom, asked if another assessment district is being considered for tree trimming and street sweeping. The Mayor explained that the Street Lighting Assessment District was discussed during the past year, and confirmed that a minimal charge for street sweeping and tree trimming is being I 5-2-88 considered. Mr. Don Spears, 4601 Guava Avenue, stated his opposition to the proposed Assessment District, suggesting that another means of raising revenues should be sought, such as increased parking fees in the downtown area. Mr. Carl SanFilippo, Avalon Drive, objected to the Assessment District stating it is unfair and against the law, a general tax used for purposes other than street lighting, stating I that the City should cut rather than raise taxes, and employees should be reduced through attrition. Ms. Imogene Parko, 313 Central Avenue, spoke for placing an assessment on Surfside and Sunset Beach properties for sand replenishment rather than the City assuming that cost. She also said that once an assessment is in place it is never rescinded. Mayor Wilson advised that the Lighting Assessment District in 1983/84 was eliminated after one year as it was felt it was no longer needed, and Councilman Clift noted that s~nce sitting on the Council, each year, with the exception of one, there has been a reconstruction project of at least one block of College Park East streets at a cost of approximately $100,000 per block. Ms. Miriam Skinner, 125 - 6th Street, objected to the Assessment District on the basis of it being a new tax and that the term of the assessment was not stated. She stated also that many old town residents have paid for their lighting as well as sidewalks and curbs, therefore it is felt they are being charged for what has been paid for. In response to a member of the audience, the City Attorney explained that the assessment could be continued for another year only after the holding of another public hearing before the Council. Councilman Hunt pointed out that the City's share of the annual tax bill is approximately seventeen to eighteen percent, and I explained that the notice provided to each property owner set forth the projects that could be accomplished through the relief of the General Fund of street lighting costs. Mr. Tom Heinz stated that although he is not a resident, he owns commercial property in the City and pays considerable taxes, and even though his assessment does not appear to be a large amount, he objected to raising taxes under a 1972 Street Lighting Act. Ms. Deborah Knowlton, 12518 Montecito Road, suggested that the title of the assessment should be for what the funds are intended rather than lighting, stating that the notice did not specify that the assessment was for one year nor that it required another public hearing to be continued, and expressed concern that the amount will escalate in future years. Mr. SanFilippo addressed the Council again, suggesting that this matter be placed to a vote. There being no further communications, Mayor Wilson declared the public hearing closed. RESOLUTION NUMBER 3781 - STREET LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 1 - FISCAL YEAR 1988/89 Resolution Number 3781 was presented to Council entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH ORDERING PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO BE MADE AND THE FORMATION OF A STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT NO.1, CONFIRMING THE DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENTS, AND LEVYING ASSESSMENTS FOR THE STREET I LIGHTING DISTRICT NO.1 FOR FISCAL YEAR 1988-89." By unanimous' consent, full reading of Resolution Number 3781 was waived. Councilman Grgas pointed out that no one likes to raise the cost of living, and that many persons in the community do not enjoy the benefits of having purchased their property prior to Proposition 13, stating however that the taxes that are paid go towards providing the best services possible for the City. He noted comments made regarding expenditure of funds, inadequate services and repairs, and acknowledged that there has been a deficiency in street and sidewalk repairs and other improvements due to lack of revenues, that last year police personnel were added 5-2-88 I yet people continue to request more. Mr. Grgas pointed out that although budgets of similar size cities may be less, many of their services are by contract, often on the tax roll and not shown in the budget, where for instance, Seal Beach has a Lifeguard Department, and a local Police Department as it is felt better protection and more responsive service is provided. He clarified that the only City funds that have been spent for beach replenishment in recent years has been for movement of sand from the west to the east beach, not for placement of sand in Surfside. Councilman Grgas noted that an argument has been made by some that this is an unjust tax, however he stated it is necessary, the alternatives being reduction of police, deletion of necessary repairs, and reduced services that the community has demanded. He also stated he felt the City staff is among the best in local government, that their salaries are not inordinate compared to other cities, and that it would be unreasonable to not allow salary adjustments. Mr. Grgas stated he felt that the amount of the assessments are reasonable for the services provided, that the Council endeavors to insure that each district in the City gets its fair share of available monies for improvements, and pointed out that the City noticed the property owners of what improvements may be considered with monies that would be made available by the Assessment District. Councilman Grgas noted that although it is not the desire of the Council, the Assessment District is necessary for the protection of the City's infrastructure and for the continuation of protection and services requested by the community, adding that the Street Lighting Assessment District is legal under California law. Councilman Hunt noted that philosophically his spirit of Proposition 13 is likely as strong as that of the members of the audience. He stated he wished it to be ,clearly understood that he, and most likely the other members of the Council, are intentionally working to circumvent Proposition 13 for the reason that the City is in need of money, that conclusion becoming most evident with thorough review of the budget, and there being few alternatives to legally obtain the needed revenue. He noted that the percentage of property tax that the City receives is only approximately one-half of the Police budget. Councilman Grgas responded that although he did not necessarily agree that this is an attempt to circumvent Proposition 13, that legislation did take away considerable revenue as well as the ability to raise revenue through tax increases. He recalled three recent ballot measures relating to fees that have been unsuccessful due to the two-thirds approval requirement, noting specifically the paramedic service tax where, after its defeat, the City was obligated to find a means of funding that service thus all other necessary major expenditures had to be postponed in hopes that the revenue outlook would improve, which it has not. Councilman Clift stated that if it is not possible to derive additional revenue from property taxes, and there is inadequate increase in sales tax, bed tax, etc., the Assessment District is a tool to pay the City's electric and maintenance costs, relieving the General Fund of that payment thus allowing reallocation of those monies to other necessities that have been delayed over the years. He again pointed out that College Park East streets are being improved a little at a time, which is costly due to the need for complete reconstruction in that area versus a less expensive overlay. Mayor Wilson noted that each year needed improvements are cut from the budget due to lack of revenues, the cost of labor and supplies increase, yet there is a mandate to do certain things in order to operate the City. She stated there is a need to improve commercial I I 5-2-88 development to provide services and products for the residents, which in turn increases property, sales and business taxes to the City, however when development is mentioned there is a cry of overdevelopment. Mayor Wilson pointed out the substantial savings to property owners since the passage of Proposition 13, and echoed the need for the Assessment District or other fees that may be necessary to meet the demands of the City. Councilman Grgas stated he wished to pose certain questions of residents for clarification, noting that the actual assessment, with the exception of commercial, is on a per parcel basis rather than per unit basis, asked why vacant lots are assessed the same as a single family dwelling, and if the same formula would be true of one unit built upon two adjoining lots. Mr. Robert Brown, Willdan Associates, responded that vacant lots receive the benefit whether or not they are develped, and that the same concept is followed in the case of adjoining lots with one dwelling. Mr. Grgas inquired as to why the assessment is made on a square footage basis for commercial, with specific reference to Main Street. Mr. Brown stated that in the case-of commercial properties in order to do an assessment and relate benefits for computation purposes, they look for a relationship to the single family dwelling, benefit to a single family residential property and to the commercial property. Councilman Grgas noted there are a number of factors that are taken into account for residential versus commercial uses, people, security, and intensity of benefit, day versus night time use, intensity of the use, in addition to the square footage and per unit allocations. Mr. Brown noted that the five thousand square foot figure was used as it is the common parcel size. The City Attorney explained that the difference between a tax and an assessment is that an assessment must be based upon an engineering report, such as that submitted for this Assessment District, analyzing the benefit to particular parcels in the City, and advised that there have been a number of cases in California that have uniformly concluded that special assessments are not taxes therefore have been excluded from the requirements of Proposition 13. He added that the monies derived from the assessment can only be used for the purpose of street lighting, noting however that such assessment does relieve the General Fund of that obligation. Councilman Hunt stated that although he would not propose changes he had previously discussed with the staff and Council, he would request that the Resolution reflect that Leisure World will be treated as a single parcel, the same as all other multi-units in other zones. Discussion followed. The staff confirmed that even if the definition for Leisure World were changed the total assessment would remain the same and would not affect the assessment from Leisure World or other zones. Hunt moved, second by Wilson, that the Resolution reflect a zone classification for Leisure World as one multi-unit parcel. Councilman Hunt noted this may be with the possible exception of Mutual Seventeen which would continue to be reflected as individual units. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Clift, Grgas, Hunt, Wilson None Risner Motion carried The City Attorney advised that the Resolution before the Council had been revised and approved by the City Attorney's office to reflect the technical changes incorporated in the Engineer's Report. Grgas moved, second by Hunt, to adopt Resolution Number 3781 as amended. In response to a I I I 5-2-88 question from a member of the audience, the City Engineer explained that street lighting costs include that of electrical energy and maintenance, that the City pays a flat rate per lamp which includes energy costs, maintenance and replacements as needed and performed by the Southern California Edison Company, and that any change in cost that may occur in the future would be the result of an Edison Company rate adjustment. I AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Clift, Grgas, Hunt, Wilson None Risner Motion carried By order of the Chair with consent of the Council, a recess was declared at 8:42 p.m. The Council reconvened at 8:48 p.m. with Mayor Wilson calling the meeting to order. ORDINANCE NUMBER 1273 - COMMUNITY SERVICES FEES Ordinance Number 1273 was presented to Council for second reading entitled "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA, PROVIDING FOR COMMUNITY SERVICES FEES AND ADDING CHAPTER 22A TO THE CODE OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH." By unanimous consent, full reading of Ordinance Number 1273 was waived. Grgas moved, second by Hunt, to adopt Ordinance Number 1273 as presented. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Clift, Grgas, Hunt, Wilson None Risner Motion carried I RESOLUTION NUMBER 3780 - AUTHORIZING LOAN APPLICATION SUBMITTAL - MOBILE HOME PARK ASSISTANCE PROGRAM - SEAL BEACH TRAILER PARK Resolution Number 3780 was presented to Council entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF A LOAN APPLICATION, NECESSARY TO PARTICIPATE IN THE MOBILE HOME PARK ASSISTANCE PROGRAM AND SECURE A COMMITMENT OF FUNDS FROM THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT." By unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution Number 3780 was waived. The Director of Development Services presented the staff report, explaining that with the addition of the County of Orange Housing/Community Development Department as co-applicant, the State is requiring a resolution from the City to reflect the co-application status of the County and City. Clift moved, second by Hunt, to adopt Resolution Numnber 3780 as presented. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Clift, Grgas, Hunt, Wilson None Risner Motion carried I, RESOLUTION NUMBER 3782 - COMPLETION - MODIFICATION TO BOLSA CHICA WELL - PROJECT NUMBER 565 Resolution Number 3782 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 '565, MODIFICATION TO BOLSA CHICA WELL IN ACCORDANCE WITH A CONTRACT ENTERED INTO BETWEEN UHLER, INC., AND THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH." By unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution Number 3782 was waived. Clift moved, second by Hunt, to adopt Resolution Number 3782 as presented. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Clift, Grgas, Hunt, Wilson None Risner Motion carried 5-2-88 CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEMS "H" THROUGH "M" Councilman Clift requested Item "I" removed from the Consent Calendar. Grgas moved, second by Clift, to approve the recommended action for items on the Consent Calendar, except Item "I", as presented. H. Approved the minutes of the regular meeting of March 7, 1988. J. Approved regular demands numbered 69898 through 70105 in the amount of $480,674.97, and payroll demands numbered 29977 through 30156 in the amount of $176,500.44 as approved by the Finance Committee and authorized warrants to be drawn on the Treasury for same. t K. Denied the claim for damages of Grant Hein and referred same to the City's liability adjuster. L. Denied the claim for damages of John Joseph Goodfellow and referred same to the City's liability adjuster. M. Accepted the resignation of Jay T. Covington from the Seal Beach Cable Communications Foundation and the Department of Water and Power Advisory Committee, District Four, and declared the vacancies thereof. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Clift, Grgas, Hunt, Wilson None Risner Motion carried I ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM "I" - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Councilman Clift stated he would abstain from voting on this item as he was absent from the March 2lst meeting. Hunt moved, second by Grgas, to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of March 21, 1988. AYES: NOES: ABTAIN: ABSENT: Grgas, Hunt, Wilson None Clift Risner Motion carried REPORT - SMOKING REGULATIONS The City Attorney stated that at the request of Council a report had been submitted at a prior meeting with regard to the wide range of smoking regulations that have been adopted by cities and counties in California, from minimal to stringent regulations, addressing retail stores, public meeting places, the work place, and restaurants. He noted that the concept of limiting smoking is a legally valid regulation, the degree of regulation left to the discretion of the legislative body. Mayor Wilson indicated her desire I for simple regulations where retail stores and restaurants would designate their no smoking areas. She noted her .-- concern lies with the workplace and the rights of all persons, stating that it would be preferable that employers regulate smoking except in designated areas and that the workplace be appropriately posted, however questioned whether or not an employer could be required to adopt a smoking policy which then becomes an enforcement issue. Mayor Wilson suggested that an ordinance be drafted along reasonable guidelines for consideration. The Mayor reported 5-2-88 she had reviewed the smoking regulations of Rockwell International and found them to be workable, and noted that Councilmember Risner had requested this item be held over and possibly discussed by the business community. Mr. Gordon Wall, Rockwell employee, spoke of an article with regard to controlling indoor polution. Hunt moved, second by Clift, to hold this item over until I the next meeting. AYES: Clift, Grgas, Hunt, Wilson NOES: None ABSENT: Risner Motion carried I REPORT - 1988/89 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET The City Manager reported that the proposed 1988/89 fiscal year budget had been submitted to the City Council, and reviewed his budget message for the upcoming year. Mr. Nelson advised that copies of the proposed budget are available to any interested person, and asked that the Council set the date for public hearing as well as budget workshops. He reported the budget is balanced with projected revenues covering expenditures, with a slight reduction of municipal services, explaining that the budget projects reduced controllable non-personnel expenses, reduction of part time lifeguard staff, a water rate increase, a street lighting assessment district, an increase of certain fees, rolling stock to be financed over a period of years, with reserves retained within a workable amount. Mr. Nelson reported General Fund revenues are estimated to be up 3.3 percent over fiscal year 1987/88 with proposed expenditures up 3.2 percent. He added that the proposed budget reflects a slight decrease in the cost of contract fire services, however this date notice was received that the cost of those services will instead increase $186,000 for the fiscal year. The City Manager noted that the budget reflects a new Capital Project/Purchase Account, and that a position of Senior Water Utility Operator is proposed in order to perform certain testing and reporting mandated by the State, advising that the new position is more economical than contracting for laboratory testing. The City Manager continued the review of each point of his budget message specifically relating to the City's present tax base and economic environment, development or redevelopment of properties, commercial and major developments, increased revenue through the availability of goods and services to residents, and full cost recovery for services. Wilson moved, second by Grgas, to receive the budget message presented by the City Manager, and to schedule the public hearing on the 1988/89 fiscal year budget for the regular City Council meeting of June 6, 1988. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Clift, Grgas, Hunt, Wilson None Risner Motion carried I By consensus of the Council, a budget workshop was scheduled for Thursday, May 19th at 5:00 p.m. BOARD and COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE Councilman Grgas requested that the District One appointment to the Project Area Committee be held over. Councilman Clift requested that the District Four appointment to the Planning Commission be held over. 5-2-88 RESOLUTION NUMBER 3783 - "WAR ON DRUGS" At the request of the Orange County Division of the League of California Cities, Resolution Number 3783 was presented to Council entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH JOINING ORANGE COUNTY CITIES IN THE "WAR ON DRUGS." By unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution Number 3783 was waived. Grgas moved, second by Wilson, to adopt Resolution Number 3783 as presented. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Clift, Grgas, Hunt, Wilson None Risner Motion carried I CITY COUNCIL ITEMS Councilman Grgas stated it was his understanding that the Rough Water Swim Committee has been asked to pay a substantial sum this year to conduct this annual event, and requested that a report regarding same be provided the Council. The City Manager advised that the charges for the Rough Water Swim is an effort to recover full costs that have been absorbed by the City in the past, and reported that the Committee had been informed last year of the costs and it was suggested that they include those costs in the preparation for this year's Rough Water Swim. The City Manager noted Councilmember Risner had requested that the City place an ad in the Rough Water Swim program welcoming the swimmers to Seal Beach at a cost of $120, and that this item be placed on the next agenda. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were no Oral Communications. CLOSED SESSION No closed session was held. I ADJOURNMENT Grgas moved, second by Hunt, to adjourn the meeting at 9:45 p.m. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Clift, Grgas, Hunt, Wilson None Risner Motion carried of the Approved: ~AAA)~'~ Mayor I Attest: