City of
CITY COUNCIL MEETING:
MINUTES
The meeting was CALLED TO ORDER at
Council Members Present: Mayor Priscilla Hill; Vice-Mayor Dias, Councilmember Edge, Councilmember Laverone, and Councilmember Paradice.
Council Members Absent: None
Staff Present: City Manager (CM) Jan McClintock; City Attorney (CA) George Thacher, City Planner (CP) Matthew Sundt, Deputy City Clerk (DCC) Trish Patez, and Minutes Clerk Judi Johnson
Staff Absent: Interim Fire Chief Scott Freels
Elected Officials Present: City Treasurer Paul Petersen
Elected Officials Absent: City Clerk Shawna Serna
CEREMONIAL ITEMS
A. Mayor Hill presented Certificates of Recognition and a gift to members of the Anzar Athletic Baseball and Softball Teams (athletic coaches and players as she introduced each for their participation in the Rootin’ Tootin’ Wild Wild West Show.
B. Certificate of Congratulations for City Clerk
Shawna Serna on her new position as City Clerk with the City of
ON A MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER LAVERONE, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DIAS,
THE AGENDA WAS APPROVED (5-0) AS PRESENTED,
WITH THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBER DIAS, COUNCILMEMBER EDGE,
COUNCILMEMBER HILL, COUNCILMEMBER LAVERONE, AND COUNCILMEMBER PARADICE. NOES:
NONE; ABSTAIN: NONE; ABSENT: NONE.
PUBLIC COMMENT
ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Mayor Hill opened, and then closed the floor for public comments for items not on the agenda.
- CM McClintock explained the Library report was included in the Councilmember’s packets, which had been distributed.
- CM McClintock reported that due to a change in the Code Enforcement personnel, the report was not included this month.
All other information items (A-B-D-E) were placed on file, CM McClintock indicated.
A. Report from Closed Session of the City
Council
B. Sheriff’s Report: Monthly Activity: Deputy Mark Williams went over the high lights of the , noting that vandalism had been considerably diminished due, the officers suspected, to one of subjects of interest arrested on another (unrelated) item and that might be the reason for a lesser amount of vehicle thefts. Deputy Williams read from the list of violations, providing explanations when requested. He called attention to the lost property detail, saying this had been mostly lady’s purses left setting around on benches.
C. Public Works Report – Acting Public
Works Director (APWD) Dias advised the department started fixing storm drains
on
D. Water Infrastructure Project Report – Project Manager Mark Davis said he was pleased to let the Councilmembers and residents know that we will have in our possession by June 1, 2007 the Engineer’s drawings for the City’s water and wastewater projects. Mr. Davis also informed that he had been directly in contact with the Design Engineer who will send to the drawings and other data directly to the CA Department of Health Services and EDA.
Mr. Davis said the State Historical Officer has a final copy of information the City provided for preserving Historical buildings. “We wanted a letter from the Officer for EDA, but it has not yet arrived. The only remaining items are those to be sent to the Engineers. He noted that changes suggested by Councilmember Dias, the Design Engineer and himself had been made to the distribution plant as a whole.
E. Reports by Public Officials:
COG: (Councilmember Dias)
bike lane to
LAFCO: (Councilmember Edge) in process of hiring permanent Executive Officer. Budget is being formulated budget, and includes office space for the new staff. San Juan Bautista will probably be assessed for the services for the upcoming year; due to a surplus in the funds, the City has not had to pay for several years.
Water Resources: (Councilmember Dias) Emphasis in May of Water Awareness Month.
Revolving Loan: (Mayor Hill) Had not met.
AMBAG: (Councilmember Edge) next meting at Jardine's; alternate should plan to attend
Integrated Waste Management: CA Thacher advised he has been
involved with e-mailing final copies of the RFP and the (proposed) franchise
agreement. CM McClintock informed of a joint Hollister,
Highway 156 Report Councilmember Dias) – work has commenced on the 156 flyover.
CONSENT ITEMS
A. Approve
Affidavit of Posting for
B. Approve Affidavit of Posting Hearing
C. Approve
Minutes for
D. Waive Reading of Ordinances and Resolutions on Tonight’s Agenda Beyond Title
E. Approve Resolution 2007-13 Designating Authorized Signatures for City’s Safe Deposit Box at San Benito Bank
F. Approve Resolution 2007-14 Approving Street Closures
G. Approve
Mayor Hill opened, and then closed, the public hearing for items A – B – C – D – E – F – G as no persons present indicate a wish to speak to those items on the consent agenda.
COUNCILMEMBER EDGE MOTIONED APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS A – B – C – D – E – F – G. COUNCILMEMBER DIAS SECONDED THE MOTION WHICH CARRIED (5-0) WITH THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBER DIAS, COUNCILMEMBER EDGE, COUNCILMEMBER HILL, COUNCILMEMBER LAVERONE, COUNCILMEMBER PARADICE; NOES: NONE; ABSTAIN: NONE; ABSENT: NONE.
ACTION ITEMS
Note: as each of the following items was brought forward for discussion
and potential action by the Council, Mayor Hill opened the floor for public comment
opportunity. Unless indicated, there were no speakers to the various items.
Consider Resolution 2007-15
Approving a Negative Declaration for Annexation of Approximately 49.65 acres to
SJB (“Stephens Annexation”)
CM McClintock stressed that at
this time only the Negative Declaration was to be addressed, not a
subdivision or building application. The environmental assessment is determined
by a report of the governing jurisdiction, she said, and an action this evening
will determine if the County or the City of
CP Sundt addressed the Councilmembers, saying, “This is a separate from any approval of any type. This is just the Neg Dec; and if you approve it, you will be saying it is adequate and meets CEQA requirements – so it can be taken to the County to start the 30-day statute of limitation period. This is strictly a mechanical process at this time,”
Mayor Hill opened the public hearing.
Todd Clem spoke to the Council, saying, “Projects in that area - on the hillside - have created problems in the past.” Mr. Clem referenced a lawsuit which had resulted from having the footprint impacted by the ‘flood area’ below. I don’t understand why these large properties want development, Mr. Clem declared. He went on to tell of the lawsuits against previous developers because of water swale issues at the back of his property where ‘dumped water’ pooled and increased water in the flood plain. Mr. Clem gave an overview of the volume of water and flooding at the south end of the Town. Referencing the lawsuits, Mr. Clem asserted, “We won then and we will win again, if houses are put up there. Real problems could result unless the money is up-fronted for flood control, Mr. Clem said. He went on to talk about the recommended flood control measures by Ed Hanna, a former City Official.
Tony Boch said he were not really sure of the Conditions which could to be put on when the actual annexation request was submitted. Mayor Hill clarified this was only the environmental work that was being discussed at this meeting. CP Sundt further clarified that what was actually before the Council was an environmental document required before an annexation procedure could begin. CP Sundt repeatedly stressed this was not an application for subdivision and that the applicant was only talking about and subsequently asking for annexation. CP Sundt went on to explain what is included in a Negative Declaration – and the Initial Study that preceded it. “If the day comes for submitting a subdivision application, then additional environmental assessment will be required. This is a document which can be used for basing future work,” CP Sundt said.
Jim Sleznick said he only like to say he was rather awed by the ‘fast tracking’. The work for this project to the City Council has been so fast – there has been no paper to the community regarding what is going on or if there is any community benefit. There is nothing other than to see the hill melt down to the Town; so much is unknown to the public. Mr. Sleznick said this appeared to be a clear case of the tail wagging the dog. Mr. Sleznick listed the following as important information for the citizens:
- cost/benefit ration to community
- see where money coming from
-
impacts of the work: let us know (he told of
work
- need more information for development
- no known benefit or reason
Jolene Cosio commented she understood that the Councilmembers were just looking at the environmental document but she wanted to remind everyone that these 22 acres had been for sold for $29M. It is not likely that anyone is going to pay that for one house, she said. “I don’t understand why this is being fast tracked. The City would not gain,” Ms. Cosio said. She asked for more information before the City went forward with ‘step one’.
With no others present to speak to the matter, the public hearing was closed.
CM McClintock told the audience, “When someone comes to the City with an application, the City has certain legal obligations for actions. This is not fast tracking but following the law. Because Cities had been dragging their feet and taking so much time, legislation was passed for timelines for streamlining specific items.” CM McClintock emphasized, “There is no project for this site. Just a request for annexation ‘as is’.”
Councilmember Dias said he did not agree that anything was being fast tracked. Councilmember Dias thanked CM McClintock for explaining the law. “I will be in favor of this,” he said. “I would rather this City and our Planning Commission control it rather than the County. I will go for the project as I don’t want the County to control it.”
Councilmember Paradice commented, “If we control it, I want it annexed.”
Mayor Hill reminded that LAFCo would have to review the annexation and that there has to be a split on the tax revenue. She asked if anything was going on with the revenue sharing. CM McClintock told of the difficulties of attempting to work with the County as the CAC is demanding a study which would cost in excess of $45,000 to ‘annex anything’. Councilmember Laverone asked if LAFCO could be of assistance with the revenue splitting. CM McClintock said this was different from LAFCO issues: this is just a different agreement with the County and Hollister has the agreement in place and we do not. CM McClintock said she had told the County San Juan Bautista was willing to accept the same deal that Hollister has for splitting the tax. CP Sundt said he had just gotten data on the ‘latest update and the cost estimates the financial analysis were now $33,000. CM McClintock said, “We are still in negotiations.”
COUNCILMEMBER DIAS OFFERED
RESOLUTION 2007-15, APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE ANNEXATION OF
APPROXIMATELY 49.65 ACRES TO
duBois Growth Management
Ordinance Amendment Initial Study/Negative Declaration
CP Sundt gave the staff report, noting the required public circulation period had closed, and presented the comments received yesterday from the HRB on to the City Council at this evening’s meeting. Regarding those comments, CP Sundt called attention to the issues noted:
- debate of the Initial Study (not the Negative Declaration)
- mixed use zoning ( to be considered at another time)
- amending Growth Management Ordinance
- change in ownership (relevance unclear)
- City’s General Plan allows certain types of use (applicant wants to do project economically; election would “free up” the 1% limitation)
- HRB letter referencing the Chalmers residence will be evaluated along with other resources (required by CEQA) when the project application is made
CP Sundt responded to questions from Councilmember Edge regarding the study of whether this project should be exempt from the Growth Management Ordinance.
Mayor Hill opened, and then closed, the public hearing as there were none present to address the matter.
CA Thacher advised that the relationship of agenda items B and C were so close that the two items should have discussion before a
vote was taken. Consequently, item C
was considered at this time.
Consider Resolution 2007-16
Setting Special Mail Ballot Election for August 28, 2007, Regarding a Measure
to Exempt Property in the Area of 70 Muckelemi Street from Growth Management
Ordinance Provisions; Request for Election Made by Tod duBois, Property
Developer
Councilmember Dias clarified that this resolution had been requested by the developer for an August 28 election, for which he has agreed to pay. “I want to make sure we all understand this will exempt a specific property for a specific purpose,” Councilmember Dias said. “This agenda item sets up a mail ballot for an election.” He went on to ask CP Sundt, “What indirect fiscal impact would there be to the City if the election is successful? How is that identified in the Neg Dec?” CP Sundt said the indirect fiscal impact would speculative and therefore was not analyzed in the current Neg Dec.
Responding to other questions, CP Sundt explained that if there would demolition or modification to historic structures within a project, those issues must go through CEQA reviews.
Mayor Hill opened, and then closed, the public hearing with non one indicating a wish to speak to the issue.
Councilmember Dias confirmed that if this Resolution were adopted, the result would be to have mail ballot.[yes]
Describing the importance of
Condition 10 (review, consideration, and approval of the Neg Dec) in the
Resolution, COUNCILMEMBER LAVERONE
OFFERED RESOLUTION 2007-16
(1) CALLING AND PROVIDING FOR A SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD
IN THE CITY ON
(2) PROVIDING FOR SAID ELECTION TO BE CONDUCTED BY MAIL
(3) PLACING ON SAID ELECTION BALLOT A MEASURE REGARDING THE AMEND-MENT
TO THE CITY’S GROWTH MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE
(4) APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR SAID BALLOT MEASURE.
Reiterating that he wanted to make sure the election would not ‘be costing us a dime’, COUNCILMEMBER DIAS SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED (5-0) BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: COUNCIL-MEMBER DIAS, COUNCILMEMBER EDGE, COUNCILMEMBER HILL, COUNCIL-MEMBER LAVERONE, COUNCILMEMBER PARADICE; NOES: NONE; ABSTAIN: NONE; ABSENT: NONE.
Authorize Hiring of Consultant
for Election Services
DCC Patez reported she had been able to contact four consultants in this matter, with two submitting bids. At the request of CM McClintock, DCC Patez gave an overview of the bids amounts:
|
Chapman and Associates |
Harris and Associates |
|
$11,830.87 |
+/- $7,000 |
CM McClintock said that the Harris bid appears to rely much more heavily on City Staff, and the indication is that the group ‘will guide city staff’. Whereas, Chapman personnel would be doing more of the work (mail the ballots, etc). CM McClintock reminded the City doesn’t have staff to do this work, and while the Chapman and Associates bid is more expensive, the use of the services of Chapman and Associates to do entire thing may be imperative with the reduced staff at City Hall. “In fact, it is even more critical to have the total work done,” CM McClintock reported.
CA Thacher reminded that in the Resolution just adopted, the applicant must pay the costs of the election.
Commissioners discussed: even though the Chapman and Associates had submitted the higher bid, it would make more sense to go with a Consultant who could provide a complete service. Councilmember Laverone asked if it would be good to include in the motion an amount ‘not to exceed’. CM McClintock advised what usually occurs is an amount of the allocated bid plus a contingency.
Councilmembers also discussed:
- whether the applicant will be charged for any ‘back staff’ (City staff for questions, etc.)
- time City staff will be actively involved in the work of the election (minimal)
- ‘upfront money’ required
CA Thacher advised that if the City is not paid on a ‘fiscal pass through’ basis for the election, all work would cease.
Mayor Hill opened, and then closed, the public hearing with non one indicating a desire to speak to the issue.
COUNCILMEMBER LAVERONE MOTIONED
TO AUTHORIZE A CONTRACT, SIGNED BY THE CITY MANAGER, WITH CHAPMAN AND
ASSOCIATES NOT TO EXCEED $13,000 WITH SAID MONEY TO BE DEPOSITED TO THE CITY BY
THE APPLICANT WITHIN 15 DAYS OF THE CONTRACT SIGNING; THE MONIES ARE BE PLACED
IN A SPECIAL ACCOUNT, WITH AN EXCESS RETURNED TO THE APPLICANT. COUNCILMEMBER
DIAS SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED (5-0)
BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: COUNCIL-MEMBER DIAS, COUNCILMEMBER EDGE,
COUNCILMEMBER HILL, COUNCIL-MEMBER LAVERONE, COUNCILMEMBER PARADICE; NOES:
NONE; ABSTAIN: NONE; ABSENT: NONE.
Public Hearing: Introduce
Ordinance 2007-XX Amending and Adding Certain Sections of Chapter 7-6, 7-8, and
10-2 of the Municipal Code, Regarding Undergrounding of Utilities,
Encroachments for the Purpose of Undergrounding, and Restoration of Streets
Following Undergrounding
Introduction of an Ordinance amending and adding certain Sections of Chapter 7-6, 7-8, and 10-2 of the Municipal Code, pertinent to under-grounding utilities, encroachments for under-grounding, and restoration of streets following under-grounding: CM McClintock reported having received a new notice from AT&T upgrading for certain cities for fiber optics. In doing so, she said, AT&T will put boxes (size 48-x 48- x 2-inches) in local areas . The concern now is if an Ordinance is not in place with the requirements for under grounding the City may be ‘stuck’ with a big, ugly box. “So what this Ordinance does,” she said, “will upgrade the under-grounding requirements so that unless there is an urgent reason to underground they can’t. It also requires that if or when they cut the streets, they must replace the pavement and certain areas around the cut to bring them back to current standards.” She also advised that the City Engineer and CA Thacher had done the research with this Ordinance being placed to protect the City visual attractiveness.
Mayor Hill opened, and then closed, the public hearing with non one indicating a wish to speak to the issue.
COUNCILMEMBER DIAS MOTIONED INTRODUCTION OF THE ORDINANCE. COUNCILMEMBER EDGE SECONDED THE MOTION WHICH CARRIED (5-0) WITH THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBER DIAS, COUNCILMEMBER EDGE, COUNCILMEMBER HILL, COUNCILMEMBER LAVERONE, COUNCILMEMBER PARADICE; NOES: NONE; ABSTAIN: NONE; ABSENT: NONE.
Consider Outdoor Contract with
Lost Forge for Outdoor Advertising on Hwy 101 and 156
CM McClintock gave the staff report, advising:
- local advertising professionals made the proposal to the Chamber of Commerce
- the Chamber is without funds for such a campaign and have asked the Council for consideration of funding
- the campaign will focus on destination advertising
- one bill board on Highway 101 generally rents for $5,000 per month
- 2 bill boards would equal approximately the City’s budget for advertising
- potential locations for bill boards with high visibility
- could also use for City sponsored events
- 86,000 cars per day near 101 and 156 exit
- advertising could focus on ‘charms’ of San Juan Bautista: to visit or just ‘check us out’ Initial thought formerly, the City could have assessed businesses to spread the cost; but with SB 218, that practice is no longer allowed
- City fiscal difficulties: need for increased sales tax revenue
- if Council wishes to have the billboards, must act now (if not, summer season will pass by)
Mayor Hill opened the public hearing.
Tony Boch told the Council, “No, no, no!” He cited the fact that City Hall is only open 3 - 4 hours day and now there is only public works employee. “If the Chamber wants to do it, fine. But you can’t take from the residents to benefit downtown businesses and the City doesn’t have the money to spend.”
Denice Verhoeven told the Councilmembers she is the current Treasurer of the Chamber and had been present during the presentation of billboard advertising. “I think it’s a great idea,” Ms. Verhoeven said. She went on to say the advertising committee is working on increasing revenue and that the committee
thinks this is a ‘worthwhile proposal’. Ms. Verhoeven said this can be good visual recognition for San Juan Bautista and she ‘highly recommended’ it.
Todd Clem told of running a B&B in town for several years. “I did my level best to make it fly and I loved doing it.” Mr. Clem said he did no advertising other than what he ‘got thru an AAA listing’. “Basically, we found out that the essential and basic problem was that San Juan Bautista doesn’t count as an ‘end designation’,” he said. Mr. Clem told of trying to work with other businesses but most amounted to miniscule participation. “What did work,” Mr. Clem said, “was a travel magazine that brought people into events. You remember Rebecca McGovern had an amazing ability to get free advertising all over. With respect to the Chamber, if they put up billboards, there could be a 15-second exposure to the public and that money would have been ‘blown away’. If you want to attract attention, you would do better finding someone to do good P.R. for magazines and pay that person.”
Jolene Casio said she ‘loved the idea of billboards if the money spent might bring in people. Ms. Casio said it might be practical to look at magazines and the Catholic Mission to include in listings about the City. “If we can use free publications, hopefully we can build up interest in coming here,” Ms. Casio said. She asked if the Chamber or the City had talked to Dona Esther’s to see if they are getting good response to their billboards? As Ms. Casio spoke of going past the Case de Fruta signs, she remembered that there were ‘many of them’ and said she was not sure if billboards were the right answer.
Helena Kleinsmith told the Councilmembers that, with regard to bill boards, and with all respect to the Chamber’s advertising committee, she was asking the Council not to go forward with the billboards. Concerns of rising prices for the billboards and the fact that the billboards provide only a ‘3-second flash’ were her main objections. “We must relay the toughest thing: branding of San Juan Bautista,” Ms. Kleinsmith said as she told of problems with various (former) plans for advertising campaigns:
- design problems {everyone wanted to be noticed, not have a generic sign}
- lack of make impact because of brief exposure to billboard
- other opportunities: weekly advertising on radio was effective more price effective
Ms. Casio spoke again saying, “We aren’t taking advantage of the free travel publications available” She illustrated a ‘throw-away’ travel publication which is widely available to travelers, and noticed that people do ‘pick them up’.
With no others present to address the matter, the public hearing was closed.
CM McClintock advised that a representative from Dona Esther's worked with the locals/professionals who have made the billboard and Dona Esther’s think theirs is successful. CM McClintock said the City would not be involved with individual advertising for events; that will be the responsibility of the promoter, be it the Chamber or whoever. Councilmember Paradice reminded that an event coming up (recertification of the DeAnza trail) which could work for the City in conjunction with the State for publicity.
Councilmembers discussed the following:
- Edge thinks it’s a good idea; money seems extremely reasonable for what is, but ‘can the City afford it’? It would be better if it was paid for by the Chamber; it seems more appropriate for the business community to foot the bill.
- Dias agreed with Edge, but said at this point the Chamber could not do it; they are in a hard situation too. So we have no advertising; what are we going to do? We need to come up with something.
- Laverone agreed, but said the City needs to utilize free publicity/advertising. We still could get a spot on Sunday morning if a speaker would go to Channel 36; the manager of that service has pledged he will do a segment at my request but we need a person to be interviewed; we need to exploit the free stuff. “I will vote against this proposal; we need to handle things like this during the budget process. The City can’t handle or afford this.”
Councilmember Dias clarified: the City can’t raise local business licenses without a vote of the public so basically the City can’t raise fees or taxes for this purpose. CA Thacher agreed, “The City cannot raise fees or taxes.” Councilmember Dias asked when a contract for the billboards would have to be signed. CM McClintock said, “If we wait, we will miss a lot of the summer.” Councilmember Dias commented, “We’re damned if we do this or not.”
Councilmember Laverone said there other ways of advertising: cable TV, radio (which he described as dirt cheap) with a lot of Bay Area spots cheaper with the right radio stations.
Discussion ensued as to who should do advertising; it was noted the Chamber has an advertising committee. Councilmember Laverone expressed thinking that advertising was the ‘Chamber’s place’ and the City can’t afford it. CM McClintock cited the need for promoting tourism, and the lack of a redevelopment agency which causes advertising to become partially a responsibility of the City.
Councilmember Edge reiterated the City does not have money for this purpose.
Reminding that since an increase in business licenses is not a possibility, CM McClintock spoke of one-time monies from Casa de Mission which can’t be used for balancing the budget but can be used for other one-time uses. “We can’t increase funds with business licenses, so we are seeking some other way.
Councilmember Edge said he had been impressed by what heard from Ms. Kleinsmith about the cost of advertising. Councilmember Edge said he listens to KCBS, and believes the redundancy of hearing spot advertising over and over sticks with the listeners as an effective way to get the word out. “We need to look at maximizing our dollars, but if we spend those dollars on a radio spot instead of a billboard, it might be wise.”
Councilmember Laverone said he drove by billboards everyday – and couldn’t begin to tell anyone what the billboards messages are.
CM McClintock cautioned that there are many niches with radio listeners, and that makes it difficult to target listeners in such a large area.
Councilmember Dias noted there were four professional advertisers in town, and he had been able to make contact with three of them regarding the potential of setting up billboards. “Two thought it was a great idea, and one thought it was ok, but money is the issue,” Councilmember Dias said.
MAYOR HILL ASCERTAINED THAT NO MOTION ON THE ISSSUE WAS FORTHCOMING;
AND DECLARED THE MATTER OF CONSIDERATION OF AN OUTDOOR CONTRACT WITH LOST FORGE
FOR OUTDOOR
Public Hearing: Introduce
Ordinance 2007-XX Adding Chapter 5-8 to Municipal Code Establishing Certain
Property Maintenance Standards
CM McClintock presented the staff report advising that on many numerous occasions Code Enforcement has written citations for better property maintenance – and it was not just the historic district where the complaints were found. “If peeling paint or tarps on roofs become real blight that enables the Code Enforcement Officer to work with those owners before it becomes a health and safety issue. CM McClintock advised this item had been promoted by the HRB and the Code Enforcement Officer for the City. CA Thacher and CP Sundt had researched the matter and reported to her that litter and other things are not covered in the Code. This action will allow City personnel to go to talk to residents when concerns are recognized. This is an introduction and first reading of the proposed Ordinance, CM McClintock said, with a public hearing scheduled for the next City Council meeting.
Mayor Hill opened, and then closed, the opportunity for public comment as no one indicated a desire to speak to the issue.
Responding to a question from Councilmember Paradice, CM McClintock told the Councilmembers that if a building is historic, different measures may apply. One of the dangers, CM McClintock explained: peeling paint can become a health and safety issue, such as lead based paint flecking off.
COUNCILMEMBER LAVERONE MOTIONED TO INTRODUCE ORDINANCE 2007-XX ADDING CHAPTER 5-8 TO MUNICIPAL CODE ESTABLISHING CERTAIN PROPERTY MAINTENANCE STANDARDS. COUNCILMEMBER PARADICE SECONDED THE MOTION WHICH PASSED (5-0) WITH THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: COUNCIL-MEMBER DIAS, COUNCILMEMBER EDGE, COUNCILMEMBER HILL, COUNCIL-MEMBER LAVERONE, COUNCILMEMBER PARADICE; NOES: NONE; ABSTAIN: NONE; ABSENT: NONE.
Presentation of
CM McClintock asked Councilmember Dias to address this matter. Councilmember Dias introduced Pat Garrett who he said had been ‘ram-rodding this project’. Mr. Garrett said the blueprints were coming along and with what had been proposed, the only thing remaining were the electrical and heating. “I want to see if you like what has been presented, then continue with the process for bid,” Mr. Garrett said. Mr. Garrett cautioned that the plans ‘here are just temporary’; I’m hoping for ‘real blueprints’ by the end of May. Mr. Garrett gave an overview of ‘exactly what will happen’.
Councilmembers asked Mr. Garrett about specific aspects of the plan, to which he responded accordingly. Councilmember Laverone said he thought it a good plan; and based on the concept presented, it seemed Mr. Garrett had produced the usual ‘exceptional work’.
Mayor Hill opened, the closed, the opportunity for public comment with none in attendance to speak to the matter.
COUNCILMEMBER LAVERONE MOTIONED TO HAVE THE CITY MANAGER CONTINUE TO GO FORWARD WITH THE PROCESS AND SUBSEQUENTLY ONCE THE FINAL PLANS HAVE BEEN REVIEWED BY THE CITY MANAGER, TO BEGIN WORK WITH THE ARCHITECT. COUNCILMEMBER DIAS SECONDED THE MOTION WHICH PASSED (5-0) WITH THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBER DIAS, COUNCILMEMBER EDGE, COUNCILMEMBER HILL, COUNCILMEMBER LAVERONE, COUNCILMEMBER PARADICE; NOES: NONE; ABSTAIN: NONE; ABSENT: NONE.
Approve Resolution 2007-17
Establishing New Encroachment Fees
CM McClintock reminded that last month there had been a request for lessening the encroachment fee for smaller projects. The City Engineer was present to address the matter at this meeting. He explained that the fee was not as low as he, the City and the residents might wish but he repeated what was so often said, “The City is supposed to recover cost.” CM McClintock agreed, saying if the fee(s) did not cover the cost, the Council would have to declare findings that the City general fund could handle the costs.
Mayor Hill opened, and then closed, the public hearing, having noted no one was present to speak to the matter.
Councilmember Laverone asked if a private property owner had an emergency which required a standard encroachment permit could the work be completed without the permit.
The City Engineer said that a permit is required by Code but if an emergency occurred on Saturday, the resident could get a ‘temporary patch’ and follow up during City Hall hours.
COUNCILMEMBER DIAS OFFERED RESOLUTION 2007-17, ESTABLISHING NEW ENCROACHMENT FEES. COUNCILMEMBER EDGE SECONDED THE MOTION WHICH PASSED (5-0) WITH THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBER DIAS, COUNCILMEMBER EDGE, COUNCILMEMBER HILL, COUNCILMEMBER LAVERONE, COUNCILMEMBER PARADICE; NOES: NONE; ABSTAIN: NONE; ABSENT: NONE.
Council to Decide How to Vote
on Mosquito Abatement
DCC Patez reported that all residents in the identified District area had received ballots at home and the City had received a ballot, as well. CM McClintock said the City had received two ballots and was not exempted from the fee if the measure passes. Mayor Hill reminded she had been on the Mosquito
Abatement committee, and until this year state grants had funded the program. Mayor Hill described the worthwhile work done by the program. Put in lines serviced ponds and any standing water
COUNCILMEMBER LAVERONE MOTIONED TO DIRECT THE MAYOR TO CAST VOTES IN
THE AFFIRMATIVE FOR THE MEASURE. COUNCILMEMBER EDGE OFFERED THE SECOND. THE
MOTION PASSED (5-0) WITH THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBER DIAS,
COUNCILMEMBER EDGE, COUNCILMEMBER HILL, COUNCILMEMBER LAVERONE, COUNCILMEMBER
PARADICE; NOES: NONE; ABSTAIN: NONE; ABSENT: NONE.
Mayor Hill declared the following three items continued to the
June, 2007 City Council meeting at the request of the City Planner.
Public Hearing: Adopt
Ordinance 2007-XX Amending the Historic Resources Ordinance – Continued to June
pending SHPO Certification of proposed changes
Consider Appeal of Planning
Commission Decision on
Adopt Ordinance 2007-XX
Amending Title 11, Chapter 11.10 Signs – Continued to June per Planner
Discussion Items – Old Business:
Committee reports:
Cable TV Franchise Renewal
CM McClintock reported on a meeting with Hollister and
Public Works (Dias): no further report
Parks: to meet on Friday
Development and Historic Resources (Edge/Paradice): will have continuing talks with County, re: revenue splitting at annexation
Budget/Finance/Economic Development: meeting anticipated soon
Public Safety/Fire Department: Councilmember Laverone and Councilmember Edge met with Sheriff Hill informally
Ad hoc committee reports:
State Park: Councilmember Edge will continue efforts to bolster relationships
Growth Management Ordinance: no report
DISCUSSION ITEMS – NEW
BUSINESS
Determine Whether to
Agendaize Chamber of Commerce Letter Dated
Councilmember Laverone advised the Chamber President spoke to him, asking how to go about having a committee of the City Council to talk to Chamber representatives about promotions/events within the City. Councilmember Laverone said that the new Chamber officers feel there have been contradictory requests in the past and that there is need for a uniform voice. The Chamber, Councilmember Laverone said, appears to think a workshop basis would be effective.
Councilmember Dias said, “The recently received letter was ‘way out of line’. We’re asked the Chamber for meetings and critiques of the events. They have dropped the ball. We’ve been trying to work with the Chamber for quite a while, but this letter is…”
Councilmember Laverone agrees about the letter, saying it would be better not to speak to that stance.
MAYOR HILL INDICATED A WISH TO MEET WITH THE CHAMBER PRESIDENT AND
COUNCILMEMBER LAVERONE (as a special Subcommittee) DURING BUDGET TIME (THIS HAD
BEEN A REQUEST BY THE CHAMBER).
BY CONSENSUS, THE COUNCILMEMBERS INDICATED THAT HAVING THE MEETING
DESCRIBED BY MAYOR HILL WOULD BE SUITABLE, VALIDATED THE SPECIAL SUBCOMMITTEE,
AND STATED THAT THE LETTER DID NOT MERIT AGENDAIZING.
Outstanding monies and
reports due to City from Chamber of Commerce for event year 2006
CM McClintock reported that during the events presented in the Summer of 2005 the Chamber had been in trouble financially and so the City did not charge the Chamber the $15.00 per day. Some of Chamber officers, she said, did not know of the non-payment. “In 2006,” CM McClintock advised, “there were only three basic event payments to the City. At that time, the fiscal records were outsourced and information difficult to obtain. We still do not have an accounting, despite repeated requests nor have we gotten information about the events in 2006. At the end of the fiscal year, we need to show as accounts receivable but we can’t get the data from the Chamber. We must deal with this before the end of the fiscal year.
Mayor Hill asked if the information request had been made in writing. CM McClintock said, “Yes, with no response.” She also told of multiple e-mails and phone calls on the matter.
Mayor Hill opened the public hearing.
Denice Verhoeven told the Councilmembers that now the Chamber has a new board which is happy to work with the City Council. Ms. Verhoeven said she was the new Treasurer and was working hard work for an accounting update. Ms. Verhoeven acknowledged there was some confusion regarding assessment of fees for the local vendors. Ms. Verhoeven pledged that the President and Vice president are ‘working diligently to clarify the matter’. Ms. Verhoeven asks for a continuation and said that when the work was completed, she would return. Councilmembers thought this to be a fair request.
With no others present to speak to the matter, the public hearing was closed.
Following lengthy discussion, CM McClintock advised that by the end of the fiscal year, the City must have something on the books. Councilmember Laverone said if there is not substantial progress by the next Council meeting, he thought the item must be agendaized and his own inclination would be to suspend the fairs.
Ms. Verhoeven repeated the pledge
of working to clear the matter. By
consensus, CM McClintock was directed to work with the Mayor in having staff
monitor the matter.
Options for additional
parking and parking Meters Downtown, including options for one-way streets
CM McClintock told the Councilmembers that there had been talks in the City for many years (40 years +/-) on what to do additional parking downtown. “So now it appears we are down to this: if you want to look at increasing parking on 3rd or 2nd Streets, with different parking patterns, it would be possible to increase parking by 30%,” she said. “However, it may not be worth the hassle. Parking meters are an option to be looked at – there are independent firms who do parking meters. We obviously do not have that ability in the City right now.” CM McClintock advised that the services of a traffic engineer could plot various scenarios for parking control.
Mayor Hill indicated she would
like to consider diagonal parking on
Councilmember Laverone told of several methods of dealing with parking violators which he has experienced in his work with the law enforcement field.
Commissioners discussed:
- need for more spaces
- willingness to consider various conditions specific to locations
- interest in developing a plan
- diagonal parking
- parking meters (support for/opposition to – Council split)
- not a priority project
- how long to recover cost (re-striping streets and/or meter installation)
CM McClintock advised she will monitor the subject and return the matter to the Council as developments surface.
Set Future Agenda Items and Status:
A. Grease traps (June)
B. Trash contract (June)
C. GIS MOU (June)
D. Introduce Property Maintenance Ordinance <otherwise known as demolition by neglect> (June)
Comments:
Councilmembers: Nothing further; discussion(s) during meeting noted.
City Attorney: Nothing further; discussion(s) during meeting noted.
City Manager: Briefly noted upcoming events
ON A MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER PARADICE, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER EDGE,
AND CARRIED WITH THE UNANIMOUS (5-0) VOTE
OF ALL COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT (NONE WERE ABSENT), MAYOR HILL ADJOURNED THE
MEETING AT
Recorded and transcribed by:
Judi Johnson