HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-26-1987 Adopted CC Min REGULAR MEETING - January 26,- 1987
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on
Monday, January 26, 1987 in the meeting room of the Dublin Library. The
meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m. by Mayor Linda Jeffe~y.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Councilmembers Hegarty, Moffatt, Snyder, Vonheeder and Mayor
Jeffery.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Mayor led the Council, Staff and those present in the pledge of alle-
giance to the flag.
BART PARK & RIDE LOT
Dave Burton, representing the Dublin Chamber of Commerce addressed the
Council and expressed concerns regarding the proposed BART Park & Ride Lot.
Mr. Burton stated he was Shocked to see how little concern was displayed
regarding the affects this will have on Dublin. The business people are very
concerned regarding the traffic impacts. Traffic through the intersection of
Dublin Boulevard and San Ramon Road will be terrible. Mr. Burton indicated
they see the same type of bottleneck occuring in Dublin as occurs in
Lafayette. Other locations should be considered. We should ask BART for a
complete EIR on the Park & Ride site which will eventually become a BART
station.
Cm. Snyder indicated that this same issued has been discussed over a 3-4 year
process and the site is identified' in the General Plan Both Dublin and
Pleasanton approved the site following many public hearings.
Mayor Jeffery advised Mr. Burton that due to a revision in the Brown Act, the
Council is unable to act on any items not agendized.
Mr. Burton requested that this item be agendized for discussion at the next
regular City Council meeting on February 9, 1987.
CONSENT CALENDAR
On motion of Cm. Vonheeder, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote,
the Council took the following actions:
Approved Minutes of Regular Meeting of January 12, 1987;
Approved the Financial Report for Period Ending December 31, 1986;
¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢
CM-5-19
Regular Meeting January 26, 1987
Received a report regarding the Fall 1986 Recreation Program;
Approved a program for towing services for abandoned vehicles with Gary's Tow
and authorized the Mayor to execute the agreement; authorized a budget
transfer in the amount of $3,000 from the Contingent Reserve;
APproved a Budget change of $13,450 for costs associated with the outfitting
of police vehicles with light bars, push bars, etc.;
Approved Warrant Register in the amount of $334,137.22
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
RE DRUG INTERVENTION PROGRAM
The City ~has received a letter from "The Center", requesting the City to
contribute 1/3 of the cost of putting on a Drug Intervention Program for
Tri-Valley residents. The total cost for speaker's fees associated with
this program is $900. The Cities of Livermore and Pleasanton have each
committed to a $300 contribution.
Joyce Friedman from The Center was present at the meeting and explained the
program in more depth. They have been in the Dublin schools for over 10
years. The Center and The Phoenix Program are planning a teen and adult
presentation on March 18, 1987, to be held at the Amador High School
auditorium. Teenagers who are recovering from chemical dependency will
perform dramatizations of their own addiction experiences.
Mayor Jeffery questioned how the limited attendance issue will be addressed.
Ms. Friedman indicated they would do equal public relations in all
communities. Admission will be free.
When questioned, City Attorney Nave advised Cm. Snyder that he should
abstain from the vote on this issue because he' sits on the Board for The
Center.
On motiOn of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by majority vote,
(Cm. Snyder abstained), the Council authorized a $300 contribution for this
program and authorized a Budget Transfer from the Contingent Reserve.
PUBLIC HEARING
SIGN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing.
On January 12, 1987, the City Council introduced an Ordinance amending the
City's Sign Ordinance and adopted a Resolution approving the associated
Negative Declaration. This Ordinance will amend the City's existing Sign
Ordinance related to: 1) allowing two Freestanding Signs on large parcels,
2) Special Easement Signs; 3) Service Station Display and Price Signs, 4)
¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢
CM-5-20
Regular Meeting January 26, 1987
Identification Signs, 5) Low Profile Signs, 6) Time/Temperature Signs and
Electronic Readerboard Siqns, 7) ShoDpinq Center Master Identification Signs,
and 8) reformatting and renumbering the Ordinance to enhance its readability.
No comments were made by members of the public.
Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing.
On motion of Cm. Snvder, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by majority vote, the
Council waived the reading and adopted
ORDINANCE NO. 6 - 87
AMENDING THE CITY ZONING ORDINANCE RELATING TO SPECIAL EASEMENT SIGNS,
LOCATION AND NUMBER OF PERMITTED FREESTANDING SIGNS,
SERVICE STATION DISPLAY AND PRICE SIGNS, IDENTIFICATION SIGNS,
LOW PROFILE SIGNS, TIME/TEMPERATURE SIGNS, AND ELECTRONIC READERBOARD SIGNS,
AND SHOPPING CENTER MASTER IDENTIFICATION SIGNS
Cm. He,arty voted NO on this motion.
PUBLIC HEARING
APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DENYING
SIGN VARIANCE APPLICATION - HOWARD JOHNSON's MOTOR LODGE
Staff advised the Council that on January 21, 1987, the Applicant advised
Staff via telephone that he was withdrawing the application for a sign
variance to exceed the maximum permitted area for a directional sign. The
recent si~n ordinance amendment prompted this withdrawal.
PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE CHANGING VIOLATIONS
OF BUILDING AND ZONING REGULATIONS FROM A MISDEMEANOR TO INFRACTIONS
. , ,___, .... ~ ~,~u. ~
Mayor Jefferv opened the public hearing.
Staff explained that this ordinance, which was introduced at the January 12,
1987 City Council meeting is intended to facilitate enforcement of building
and zoning codes, leading to a higher compliance rate.
No comments were made by members of the public.
Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing.
On motion of Cm. Hegart¥, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and bv unanimous vote,
the Council waived the reading and adopted
¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢
CM-5-21
Regular Meetinq January 26, 1987
ORDINANCE NO. 7 - 87
AMENDING 11.15 OF CHAPTER 1, ORDINANCE NO. 2-84, AMENDING SECTION 8-107
OF ARTICLE 9, PART 2, CHAPTER 2, TITLE 8 ALAMEDA COUNTY ORDINANCE CODE
AS ADOPTED BY THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND REPEALING SECTION 8-107.1
ARTICLE 9 PART 2 CHAPTER 2 TITLE 8 ALAMEDA COUNTY ORDINANCE CODE
AS ADOPTED BY THE CITY OF DUBLIN
and adopted
RESOLUTION NO. 6 - 87
APPROVING BUILDING INSPECTION DEPARTMENT
POLICY AND PROCEDURE FOR CITATIONS
PUBLIC HEARING
ORDINANCE INCREASING CITY COUNCIL SALARIES
Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearinq.
Staff explained that this ordinance, which was introduced at the January 12,
1987 City Council meetinq, would provide for the increase of Council salaries
after November, 1988.
Cm. Vonheeder auestioned if the table used for establishin~ salaries was
based on population. Staff responded that it is. Cm. Vonheeder then
questioned what happens if Dublin ~umDs to the next tier. Staff advised that
the next tier was substantially higher than Dublin's current population.
Hans Hideau auestioned how much the Council currently earns. Staff responded
that the City Council is paid $300 per month.
Mayor Jefferv closed the public hearing.
On motion of Cm. Snyder, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote,
the Council waived the readin~ and adopted
ORDINANCE NO. 8 - 87
AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6 AND PROVIDING FOR AN INCREASE
OF THE SALARY FOR MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC HEARING
ORDINANCE REPEALING CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION ORDINANCES NO. 1-84 & NO. 3-84
Mayor Jeffer¥ opened the public hearinq.
Staff explained that if this ordinance is adopted, the State Law regulatina
campaiqn contributions would be the law re~ulatin~ campaign contributions in
the City of Dublin. State Law provides that candidates would have to
disclose contributions and expenditures in excess of $100 and does not place
an upper limit on constribution amounts that candidates can receive.
¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢
CM-5-22
Reqular Meetinq January 26, 1987
Elizabeth Schmitt advised that she had no objection ro raising the reporting
limit to $100, but she did not feel comfortable with allOwing unlimited
funding. She would like to see a cap Put on the amounts that could be
accepted.
Brian Raley indicated he totally supports the changing of the filing dates,
but is totally opposed to allowing any additional campaign dollar limit.
There is no correlation to the dollars spent as to the number of votes
received. He felt contributions should be limited to Dublin residents. He
questiOned where the end would be if this is opened up.
Dave Burton indicated he was in favor of complying with the State
requirements. Anyone running against an incumbent needs resources in order
to beat them. Business people who operate in Dublin certainly have an
interest in what is going on in Dublin and he, therefore, was opposed to Mr.
Raley's suggestion of allowing Dublin residents only to contribute to
campaigns. Mr. Burton indicated that sPeaking from his own experience, the
State Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC), keeps very clOSe tabs on
what goes on in ~campaigns.
Mayor Jeffery closed the pUblic hearing.
Cm. Moffatt indicated that if a candidate receives more than a $250
contribution from a single source, they would be unable to vote on an issue
affecting the donor. They would certainly be questioned also. The FPPC is
very aware and they act as watchdogs over campaigns. There are many business
owners in Dublin who do not live here. As far as the filing dates, Cm.
Moffatt felt that a lot of unnecessary work had to be done during the last
campaign.
Cm. Hegarty felt that whether a candidate spendS a great deal of money or a
great deal of time doesn't mean that one way is better than the other. The
point is to get to the people and let them know what you are all about. Cm.
Hegarty felt that the State FPPC provides enough of a check and balance
system
Cm. SnYder felt that it was unfortunate that we tend to mix the confidence of
the voters of the community with dollars. He felt that some type of a limit
should be placed on contributions.
Cm Vonheeder indicated that her original consideration was the ridiculous
filing dates. She would prefer to see a $100 cap remain, but raise the
reporting figure from $25 to $50.
Cm. Moffatt felt the guidelines used by the State FPPC are very prudent and
did not feel that we need another agency to oversee.
Mayor Jeffery indicated that she was very vocal in adopting the ordinance in
the first place and she would rather see a compromise with limiting
contributions to $100 and also raise the reporting limit to $100.
¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢
CM-5-23
Regular Meeting January 26, 1987
On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Heqarty, and by majority vote, the
Council waived the reading and INTRODUCED an ordinance repealing Dublin
Ordinance No. 1-84 and No. 3-84, regulatinq campaign contributions. Cm.
Snyder and Mayor Jeffery voted NO on this motion.
PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE AMENDING TIME FOR
FILING CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION AND EXPENDITURE STATEMENTS
Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing.
This ordinance would consolidate 7 filings into 4 filings, as well as bring
the filing period for the City's ordinance into conformance with the filing
period for the State. The City Council discussed this ordinance at its
meeting of January 12, 1987, and continued the public hearing to its ~meeting
of January 26, 1987 in order to first consider the possible repeal of
Ordinances No. 1-84 and No. 3-84. If the City Council repeals Ordinances
No. 1-84 and No. 3-84, the Council could vote to take no action.
Elizabeth Schmitt auestioned filing dates for the last election.
Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing.
On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote,
the Council agreed to take no action.
PUBLIC HEARING
ORDINANCE RELATING TO SECONDHAND DEALERS & JUNK DEALERS
Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing.
This ordinance is being brought to the City Council as part of the
comprehensive revision of the City's ordinances and development of a
Municipal Code. This ordinance would replace Title 1, Chapter 5 of the
Alameda County Code which the City adopted by Ordinance No. 13-82 and
requires Secondhand Dealers and Junk Dealers to comply with the provisions of
State Law and the City's Zoning Ordinance. A license would be obtained from
the Chief of Police.
The question was asked if this included garage sales.
Planning Director Tong explained that typically, it would not. The Zonin~
Ordinance does not regulate garage sales unless it becomes ongoing. The home
occupation guidelines would apply if it does become ongoing. These
guidelines indicate that sales from a home cannot be on an ongoing basis. If
a garage sale were held every other weekend, complaints would surely be
generated.
Cm. Moffatt questioned if this would apply to flea markets. Mr. Tong
explained that through the Administrative Conditional Use Permit procedure,
Staff can authorize this type of activity. There is a $25 processing fee.
¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢
CM-5-24
Regular Meeting January 26, 1987
Cm. Moffatt questioned if this ordinance would apply to insurance distress
merchandise. Mr. Tong responded that from a zoning standpoint, no
distinctions would be made regarding the type of merchandise.
Mayor Jeffery questioned if definitions are included in the referenced code
sections. City Manager indicated Staff could provide a copy of the somewhat
lengthy code at the next meeting.
Roy Onenea questioned if indoor flea markets would be subject to this
ordinance if there were new items in addition to hand crafted items for sale.
Staff responded that this would be an allowed useage.
Terry Schuller questioned how this changes what is already in effect. City
Manager Ambrose responded that it does not change anything.
Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing.
On motion of Cm. Snyder, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote,
the Council waived the reading and INTRODUCED an ordinance relating to
secondhand dealers and junk dealers.
PUBLIC HEARING
ORDINANCE PROHIBITING SOLICITATION AT ACCIDENT SITES
Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing.
This ordinance is being brought to the City Council as part of the
comprehensive revision of the City's ordinances and development of a
Municipal Code. This ordinance which would replace Title 5, Chapter 5,
Section 5-34.3 of the Alameda County Code prohibits soliciting or offering
for sale, tow service or any other services at the site of a vehicle accident
or other catastrophe or calamity.
Brian Rale¥ Guestioned if this also applies to attorneys. Staff responded
that it did.
Mayor Jeffer¥ closed the public hearinG.
On motion of Cm. Vonheeder, seconded by Cm. Hegarty, and by unanimous vote.
the Council waived the reading and INTRODUCED an ordinance prohibiting
solicitation at accident sites.
PUBLIC HEARING
ORDINANCE RELATING TO HOTEL AND LODGING REGISTRATION
Mayor Jefferv opened the public hearinG.
This ordinance is being brought to the City Council as part of the
comprehensive revision of the City's ordinances and development of a
Municipal Code. This ordinance which would replace Title 4, Chapter 5,
Article 1 of the Alameda County Code, and establishes regulations reGardinG
hotel registration.
¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢
,
CM-5 25
Regular Meeting January 26, 1987
No comments were made by members of the public.
Mayor Jefferv closed the public hearinG.
On motion of Cm. Vonheeder, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote,
the Council waived the reading and INTRODUCED an ordinance relating to hotel
and lodging registration.
PUBLIC HEARING
ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE EXPOSURE OF PORTIONS OF THE HUMAN BODY
Mavor Jefferv opened the public hearinq.
This ordinance is being brought to the City Council as part of the
comprehensive revision of the City's ordinances and development of a
Municipal Code. This ordinance which would replace Title 4, Chapter 1,
Article 7 of the Alameda County Code, and prohibits the exposure of certain
parts of the human body in any public place, places open to the public, or
places open to public view.
Cm. Moffatt auestioned if this ordinance would discriminate against nursing
mothers. City Attorney Nave indicated that it would not, unless they were
participating in a floor show.
Cm. Moffatt auestioned if this would make "mooninq" and "streakinG" illegal.
Staff responded that these are already illegal activities.
Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearinG.
On motion of Cm. Snyder, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote.
the Council waived the reading and INTRODUCED an ordinance relatina to
exposure of portions of the human body.
PUBLIC HEARING
ORDINANCE REGULATING UNAUTHORIZED USE OF CORPUS DATA
Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing.
This ordinance is a part of the comprehensive revision of the City's
ordinances and development of a Municipal Code. This ordinance would make it
unlawful for any unauthorized person to obtain personal data from the
Criminal Oriented Records Production Unified System (Corpus) or for any
person to provide such data to an unauthorized person. This ordinance would
replace Title 4, Chapter 1, Article 8 of the Alameda County Code which the
City adopted by Ordinance No. 13-82.
Cm. Moffatt auestioned if the word "unauthorized" is defined. Lt. Severini
explained that unauthorized would mean that information is for the sole use
of public safety investigative services and the information' could not be
passed to any group or individual not authorized to have this information.
It is elaborated in the ordinance.
¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢
CM-5-26
Regular Meetinq January 26, 1987
Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearing.
On motion of Cm. Vonheeder, seconded by Cm. Snyder, and by unanimous vote,
the Council waived the reading and INTRODUCED an ordinance regulating
unauthorized use of Corpus Data.
PUBLIC HEARING
ORDINANCE RELATING TO DRINKING IN PUBLIC
Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearinq.
This ordinance is a part of the comprehensive revision of the City's
ordinances and development of a MuniciDal Code. This ordinance does not
incorporate the provisions of the County Code which makes it unlawful to be
in a drunken condition on public streets, because this provision is covered
by State Law. The proposed ordinance makes it unlawful to drink intoxicating
beveraqes on any street, sidewalk, alley or highway. It also makes it
unlawful to drink intoxicating beverages on public or private property open
to the public and within 1,000 feet of any City street, sidewalk, etc., and
intended to be used for parking of motor vehicles, without the permission of
the property owner.
Cm. Hegarty questioned if he happened to be outside mowinq his lawn, had a
can of beer in his hand, and then decided to walk across the street and visit
a neiqhbor, would he be in violation of this ordinance.
City Attorney Nave responded that technically, he would be breaking t~he law.
Norb Hudak questioned how this would affect block Darties. City Attorney
Nave replied that it could be implied that the City gives permission by
allowinq a street closure.
David Burton felt the City is qoinq quite a ways and nit Dickinq to find
something illegal.
City Attorney Nave exDlained that this ordinance is another tool for
enforcement. A sample was cited related to recent cruise nights in Dublin,
with people standin~ on sidewalks drinkin~ beer.
Lt. Severini explained that in order to operate effectively, the Police
Department needs tools desperately.
Terry Schuller indicated she is not in favor of public drinking and
Questioned the effect on parades where people sit on the curb drinkin~ beer.
Discussion ensued related to drinking in public parks.
City Manager Ambrose indicated that in order to leqitimatelv drink in parks,
permission must be obtained from the Dublin San Ramon Services district.
Norb Hudak felt the ordinance needs some further revision.
¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢
CM-5-27
Regular Meeting January 26, 1987
Mayor Jeffery closed the public hearinq.
Cm. Hegarty indicated he had a problem with Section I wording and felt it
should be redefined.
Cm. Moffatt indicated he felt there was a problem with families usinq parks
but not being able to legally have spirits.
City Attorney Nave indicated that if DSRSD wants to prohibit drinkin~ in a
park, all that is necessary is that a sign be posted at the entrance of the
park.
Cm' Vonheeder felt that drinkinq is already prohibited at the Dublin Sports
Grounds.
On motion of Cm. Snyder, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by majority vote, the
Council waived the reading and INTRODUCED an ordinance relating to drinking
in public. Cm. Hegarty and Cm. Moffatt voted NO on this motion.
PUBLIC HEARING
ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A PROCEDURE FOR
DISPOSITION OF UNCLAIMED AND STOLEN PROPERTY
Mayor Jeffery opened the public hearing.
Staff has determined that the City does not have an ordinance providing for
the disposition of unclaimed and stolen property~ This ordinance would
establish broad procedures and ~uidelines for the disposition of unclaimed
and stolen property. Property covered by this ordinance would either be
returned to the owner, offered for public auction, destroyed or disposed of
or used by the City, depending upon the circumstances.
Mavor Jefferv auestioned who aets the proceeds from sales. City Manager
Ambrose reported that the City gets a portion and Alameda County keeps some
of the money. Roy Onenea ~uestioned the percentage that comes to the City.
City Manager Ambrose stated he did not know the actual breakdown.
Mayor Jefferv closed the public hearing.
On motion of Cm. Vonheeder, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote,
the Council waived the readinq and INTRODUCED an ordinance establishing a
procedure for disposition of unclaimed and stolen property.
REQUEST FROM DUBLIN HIGH SCHOOL
FOR MAINTENANCE ASSISTANCE AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
The City has received a letter from Joan' Kin~, Principal of Dublin HiGh
School with a proposal that would allow the Recreation Department free use of
the HiGh School facilities in return for help with maintenance of school
fields.
¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢
CM-5-28
Regular Meetin~ January 26, 1987
The Park & Recreation Commission considered this request on November 6, 1986
and was in favor of Dursuinq the issue. A subcommittee was formed to
investigate the feasibility of the proposal and to determine actual projects
in which the City could assist.
A list of projects included:
I ·
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Installation of an all weather track and stadium
Construction of an additional soccer field (South End)
Construction of an additional softball field (North End)
Upgrade of existing practice softball and baseball fields
Construction of two to four additional tennis courts
Installation of a parr course
Installation of a 9-hole Ditch and Dut course
Resurface blacktop area
Althouqh actual cost estimates have not vet been prepared, it aDDears that
the proposed projects, as well as maintenance, entail substantial costs
which have not been budqeted. Therefore, it was the recommendation of the
Park & Recreation Commission that any further consideration of Dublin High
Schools reauest be deferred until the City Council considered the reauest.
Staff recommended that the City Council consider the request from the
Principal of Dublin High School and determine 1) whether there is
sufficient benefit to the City to pursue consideration of providinq
financial assistance to Dublin High School; and 2) whether the City and
School District should jointly fund the services of a landscape architect
to identify those costs associated with the immrovements identified above
and maintenance of those improvements.
Joan Kinq indicated that she aDpreciated the opportunity to make this
presentation. The Dublin High School campus could and should be used all
year around. The facility is now 18 years old and maintenance has not been
what they would like since the passage of Proposition 13. They are excited
about tr¥in~ to upgrade the facilities. She felt that by workin~ to~ether,
the School District and the City, could enhance the facilities and could
attract special olympics and other events that would brin~ a lot of people to
Dublin.
They currently ~et hundreds of requests annually that they must deny.
Mayor Jeffery questioned if the facilities would be available to the City.
Ms. Kinq responded that whenever the school was not usin~ the facilities,
they would be available for City use.
Cm. Moffatt Guestioned if it would be posSible for high school kids to
function as volunteer staff.on some of the programs. Ms. King indicated that
they would be willing to do whatever they could to make thin~s function.
City Attorney Nave indicated he would need some time to carefully consider
legal issues involved.
Cm. Hegarty Guestioned if they had a target date in mind. Ms King
laughingly responded that she hoped to see it accomplished in her lifetime.
¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢
CM-5-29
Regular Meeting January 26, 1987
Kelly Rajala, a high school student indicated she is a tennis and soccer
player. She urqed the Council to attend sports events and see Dublin's ~
athletes in action. The athletes deserve the best conditions on which to
play. There have been some accidents in the past due to the poorly
maintained playing fields. One of the tennis courts has been out of use for
a long time. Also, the courts need windbreakers.
Liz Schmitt indicated she was on the sub-committee which spoke to the sports
groups. She indicated that her son had been hurt on a field that was not
properly maintained.
Norb Hudak indicated there is also an opportunity to put in a teen center.
Richard Berg, President of the Dublin Boosters indicated there hasn't been
many cities in California where this type of a concept can be utilized, but
it could be accomplished here. A lot of people yearn for different types of
facilities. Dublin Hiqh School has facilities that are very desirable for
community use. Where districts and cities get together and have the support
of the community, a successful program can be accomplished which greatly
benefits residents.
Cm. Hegarty stated that since becominq a City, we have been asking for pride
and identity. When large corporations consider coming into a community, they
always question the quality of life in a community and how good the schools
are. He indicated he would like to see the Council form a task force to
study this proposal and do everything possible to create the image that
residents want. He would like to see the committee set up within the next 2
weeks.
Cm. Vonheeder felt what the School District wants is a commitment from the
City Council that they should proceed with getting information.
Cm. Snyder commended Ms. King for the spirit she displayed and for what she
has done for the school and the community as a whole. He felt we must not
lose sight of the fact that it would be very difficult to proceed in light of
all that is going on in the community. She should check with the School
Board and there is a need for a strong agreement. The Council will be
looking at goals & objectives next month. Under the culture and leisure
services category, there are already 19 goals listed.
Cm. Vonheeder indicated that these kinds of programs are working for other
cities and we don't want to lose an opportunity to utilize facilities.
Mayor Jeffery indicated that if the City had a pot of gold, it would be
great. During the goals & objectives meeting, the City must look at all the
projects we are already considering. Some priorities might need to be
changed. She indicated she would feel more confortable discussing this
proposal if some of the legal issues were resolved. Mayor Jeffery also
questioned how the proposed unification issue would affect this program.
Additional funding sources should be researched that would not take away from
other projects.
¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢
CM-5-30
Regular Meeting January 26, 1987
City Manager Ambrose reported that Staff does not have the expertise to act
in the capacity of a landscape architect and felt that somewhere along the
line, we will need to get professional services from a park architect.
Ms. King reported that the School District has an architect that would be
available.
City Attorney Nave felt that the cornerstone should be to establish a legal
basis on whether this project can proceed.
Cm. Snyder also felt the School District should determine what is most
important on their list of 8 items. Ms. King indicated that they did not try
to prioritize thei~r list, but rather just looked at all the needs.
Mayor Jeffery felt the Council could consider the composition of the task
force at the next regular meeting of the City Council on February 9, 1987.
On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous vote,
the Council directed that Staff and the Park & Recreation Commission work
together and-look into the concept of a possible feasibility study.
OTHER BUSINESS
Goals & Objectives Study Session
City Manager Ambrose reminded the Council of the Adjourned Regular Meeting
scheduled for February 12th in which the Council will review the City's goals
and objectives. The format has been changed slightly and Mr. Ambrose
explained the changes to the Council.
Candidate Statements
City Manager Ambrose reminded the Council that semi-annual campaign
statements are due in the City Clerk's office no later than Friday,
January 30, 1987 at 5:00 p.m.
Citizen of the Year
Staff has been advised that due to the potential of violating the Brown Act,
it will be impossible for the selection committee to meet the following
morning to select the citizen of the year. An alternate solution was offered
that the decision could be made at the special meeting on January 28th. Cm.
Vonheeder did not feel it appropriate to discuss the issue in an open
meeting. Cm. Snyder felt the item should be tabled in order to deal with it
more appropriately. It's a very important award which should be taken very
seriously.
¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢
CM-5-31
Regular Meeting January 26, 1987
Resolution No. 145-86 which establishes the rules for the conduct of City
Council meetings, states: Page 4, 9.a. No action shall be taken on any item
not appearing on the agenda for a regular meeting as posted, unless (2) the
City Council determines by vote of four out of five members that the need to
take action arose after the agenda was posted.
In order to avoid a Brown Act violation, on motion of Cm. Snyder, seconded by
Cm. Hegarty, and by unanimous vote, the Council agreed to discuss the
composition of the selection committee and the policy under which they would
work.
Consensus of the Council was that nominations could be accepted from the
committee.
Discussion was held regarding whether a nominee could be a repeat winner.
Cm. Moffatt felt the same person should not receive the award two consecutive
years. Another suggestion was made that the same person could only win once
during a 5 year period. Also, someone suggested and the Council agreed, that
there could conceivably be years when no one would win. Consensus of the
Council was that the same person could not be selected to receive the Citizen
of the Year award in 2 consecutive years.
By consensus of the Council, the selection committee shall consist of a
representative from the City Manager's Office, a representative from the City
Council and a representative from the Chamber of Commerce.
1996 Summer Olympics
Cm. Snyder reported that he had received a copy of a resolution passed by the
County of Santa Clara Board of Supervisors regarding supporting the City and
County of San Francisco hosting the 1996 Summer Olympics. Also, due to a
federal mandate, the word Olympics cannot legally be used and must be changed
to Games.
Staff was directed to prepare a resolution for presentation at the next
regular City Council meeting supporting the 1996 Summer Olympics being held
in San FranCisco.
Wetlands Act
Cm. Snyder indicated that there are 3 diferent definitions being used with
regard to the Wetlands Act. The definition used by the U. S. Department of
Fish & Wildlife Services does not really fit the situation in the Bay Area.
Staff was directed to prepare a resolution for presentation and consideration
at the February 9, 1987 Council meeting, using the definition used by the
Regional Water Quality Control Board.
¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢
CM-5-32
Regular Meeting January 26, 1987
DSRSD Study
Cm. Moffatt questioned when the next scheduled discussion regarding the DSRSD
situation was to be.
Staff advised that this issue will be placed on the agenda for discussion at
the next regular meeting on February 9, 1987.
Stationery Notes with City Seal
Cm. Vonheeder requested that the City check into the possibility of ordering
a quantity of small note paper with the City seal displayed as was used for
the invitations to the volunteer recognition reception. She felt these would
be very useful and could be used in lieu of letterhead in most cases by the
Council.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was
adjourned at 10:24 p.m.
ATTEST:
¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢
CM-5-33
Regular Meeting January 26, 1987