Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-22-1993 Adopted CC MinutesREGULAR MEETING - February 22, 1993 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Monday, February 22, 1993, in the Council Chambers of the Dublin Civic Center. The meeting was called to order at 7:40 p.m., by Mayor Snyder. * * * * ROLL CALL PRESENT: ABSENT-. Councilmembers Burton, Houston, Howard, Moffatt and Mayor Snyder. None. * * * PLEDGE OF ALLEGI;~NCE (610-20) Mayor Snyder led the Council, Staff and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. * * * CUSTOMER SERVICE AWARD FOR MARCH (150-90) city Manager Ambrose announced that the March Customer Service Award will be given to Jason Kinney, Building Maintenance Leadperson who works for MCE Corporation. Jason was unable to attend the Council meeting but his award will be presented to him at another time. APPOINTMENT ANNOUNCEMENT - SENIOR CENTER ADVISORY COMMITTEE (110-30) Mayor Snyder stated he recommended that the Council confirm the appointment of Mary Lou Bielke to the Senior Center Advisory Committee for a 4-year term which expires on December 31, 1996. This is the first of many appointments that will be made on the various Boards. Cm. Burton stated he would like to know a little bit about the people the Council will be voting on. It should be a policy to supply some background information Cm. Houston questioned how far along they were with the other appointments. Mayor Snyder stated he and Cm. Moffatt need to schedule interview appointments for the 10+ other people. On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote, the Council confirmed the appointment. · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Regular Meeting February 9_9_, 1993 CITY SONG CONTEST (120-50) City Clerk Kay Keck advised that as a result of publicity regarding the City Song contest, 8 people had contacted her and expressed a desire to compete in writing the City's first official song. Most of the people who entered the contest either live or work in the City of Dublin. The contestants include: Steve Stewart, Pam Hanna, Joe Mason, Curt Ingram, Claudia McCormick, Heidi June Brown, Chuck Morrish and Tim Sandoli. In addition, Dan Downey expressed a desire to participate, but he was unaware of the deadline rules. Curt Ingram called to withdraw from the contest, and neither Heidi June Brown nor Joe Mason were present. Ms. Keck explained that City Councilmembers would individually rank each song on a 1 to 10 basis Following all performances, the rankings would be entered, tallied, and displayed for everyone to see. The song receiving the highest total number of points will be declared the winner. The winning songwriter will then have the next 3 weeks in which to perfect and fine tune their song, in order that it can be performed before the community as part of the festivities following the St. Patrick's Day parade to be held on Saturday, March 13, 1993. Activities and entertainment events will be held at the Shamrock Village Shopping Center on Amador Valley Boulevard @ San Ramon Road. The Council agreed to allow Mr. Downey to participate, Ms. Keck advised that the order in which the songs were to be performed would be selected at random, and names were then drawn. Song Number 1 "Dublin City Song" was created by'Claudia McCormick and John Fullard. Song Number 2 "The City of Dublin Indeed" was created by Pam Hanna. Song Number 3 was created by Tim Sandoli. Song Number 4 "Dublin Pride" was created by Dan Downey. Song Number 5 "On To Dublin" was created by Chuck Morrish and Linda Schmidt Song Number 6 "Dublin Town" was created by Steve King Stewart. Following all performances, the ranking tabulation was: Song ~1 Song ~2 Song ~3 Song ~4 Song ~5 Song ~6 Cm. Houston - Vice Mayor Burton' 4 Mayor Snyder 4 Cm. Moffatt 3 Cm. Howard 5 10 6 - 4 7 7 6 10 8 9 6 8 5 7 9 1 3 8 7 6 10 7 8 6 9 TOTAL POINTS 16 34 30 31 32 40 CM - VOL 12 - 66 Regular Meeting February 22, 1993 Song Number 6 "Dublin Town" written and performed by Steve King Stewart was declared the winner and will thus become the City's official song. Mr. Stewart expressed his pleasure and stated he had put a lot of hard work into the song. He then gave an encore performance. Mayor Snyder requested that Staff prepare a resolution or whatever the appropriate mechanism, in order for the Council to officially adopt the song and bring it back for Council adoption at the next regular City Council meeting.~ The Council asked if the music could be made available to the Dublin school bands as it would make a nice marching song. Mayor Snyder stated he.was very pleased with the enthusiasm over the City song contest, and happy to see what had come out of a chance encounter and conversation at an airport. CONSENT CALENDi~ On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Houston, and by unanimous vote, the Council took the following actions: Approved Minutes of Adjourned Regular Meeting of January 14, and Regular Meeting of February 8, 1993; Received the City Treasurer's Investment RePort as of January 31, 1993 (320-30); Received the January, 1993 Financial Report (300-40); Authorized Staff to submit a grant application for the $117,500 in funding which is available through the Lucky Stores/Oakland A's Youth Baseball Fields Program for a 60' baseball diamond project at the Dublin Sports Grounds (260-30); Authorized Staff to advertise Contract 93-04 Topaz Circle Irrigation Water Taps, for bids (600-30); Authorized Staff to advertise Contract 93-02 Annual Street Overlay & North Avenue Bike Path, for bids (600-30); Authorized Staff to advertise Contract 93-01 Downtown Street Light Additions, for bids (600-30); Approved Warrant Register in the amount of $226,913.70 (300-40). Cm. Houston requested that the item related to paratransit funding be pulled from the Consent Calendar for discussion He questioned if every City has a similar subsidy. Mr. Ambrose advised that Livermore has a subsidy to the program. Pleasanton has their own program. Livermore and Dublin are the only CM - VOL 12 - 67 Regular Meeting February 22, 1993 ones served by the LAVTA paratransit program. LAVTA has been waiting to send this amendment until the City Council determined that it was not going to withhold payment for 1992-93. On motion of Cm. Houston, seconded by Cm. Burton, and by unanimous vote, the Council approved an amendment to the agreement with LAVTA for paratransit services in order to release the City's subsidy contribution of $1,500 to offset costs associated with expanding Dial- A-Ride services to meet the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (600-40). PUBLIC HEARING IMPLEMENTATION OF NEW MULTI-FAMILY RECYCLING PROGRAM (810-60) Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. Management Assistant Barker presented the Staff Report and advised that the City's Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) identifies residential recycling as a means to reduce waste going into the landfills. Multi-family recycling is the second phase in the City's efforts to meet the State-mandated goals of AB 939. The City presently has 17 multi-family projects with approximately 2,400 units. An amended rate schedule would include a new rate of $1.26 per unit per month for multi-family recycling. Program I would cost $1.56 per unit per month and Program II would utilize $20,000 of Measure D funds and would therefore cost $1.26 per unit per month. Residents of the 17 multi-family project complexes will be provided with a portable recycling bin. Tenants will be able to deposit their newspapers, glass bOttles, jars, PET plastics, and aluminum cans into their individual container in the convenience of their unit. Two 96 gallon containers will be placed next to the multi-family units central garbage bin areas. The recycling program and the rate adjustment are scheduled to begin on May 1, 1993. Dan Borges, General Manager of LDD gave statistics on Dublin's collected recycled materials. He displayed containers that will be given to each apartment, as well as the large containers which will be placed in close proximity to the rubbish bins. Mayor Snyder questioned why they mix the 4 different recyclable items for multi-family and not for the curbside program. Mr. Borges stated in the multi-family complexes, basically there is not room to put 4 containers. Cm. Burton questioned if someone moves out and takes the container with them, will the next occupants get a new container? Mr. Borges stated there will be a $5 fee for replacement. Apartment managers will be responsible to check this, when tenants move out. · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · CM - VOL 12 - 68 Regular Meeting February 22, 1993 Cm. Moffatt asked hypothetically, if the material that is being recycled is sold for an amount over and above the cost of the service, does the company plan to make an adjustment. Mr. Borges stated he did not foresee this in the future. Because of AB 939, a lot of cities will be coming on line. Dublin did it before it was mandatory. As a result, all of the commodities have gone doWn in price. Mr. Rankin reminded that the direction that the City Council gave was that the Council had a desire to have the company assume all the risk. This is why it is not set up as a franchise operation. If they make a profit, okay, but if they don't, they can't come back to the ratepayers. No comments were made by members of the public relative to this issUe. Mayor Snyder closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted and RESOLUTION NO. 25 - 93 ADOPTING AN AGREEMENT FOR MULTI-FAMILY RECYCLINGPROGRAM RESOLUTION NO. 26 - 93 AMENDING THE SCHEDULE OF SERVICE RATES FOR SOLID WASTE COLLECTION ESTABLISHING A PER UNIT PER MONTH RATE FOR RECYCLING SERVICE FOR MULTI-FAMILY PROJECTS * * * * 1993-94 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM (480-30) Planning Director Tong advised that the total allocation to the City of Dublin from FY 1993-94 CDBG Program is $56,049. Staff proposes to submit an application for Housing Rehabilitation for $10,820, Dublin Swim Center improvements for $38,629 and General Administration for $6,600. Mr. Tong advised that applications must be submitted to the County HCD by February 26, 1993. Cm. Burton asked how many disabled people use the swim center. Mr. Tong stated he did not have that information. Mr. Ambrose stated Ms. Lowart would have this information. At one time, we had the only handicap swim program in the Valley. We suggested that this be rotated among all the pools in the area. · · · [] · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · CM - VOL 12 - 69 Regular Meeting February 22, 1993 Cm. Burton questioned how much of the $86,000 will be used to make it handicap accessible as opposed to the renovation we would do anyway. He thought it might pay us to just hire taxicabs. Mr. Rankin advised that the restrooms and bath house are currently not accessible to the handicapped. Cm. Burton asked how the housing rehabilitation money was used last year. Mr. Tong stated it was primarily through minor home repair grants. We had between 3 and 6 people that qualified last year. It was adminis- tered through the Alameda County HCD Staff. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote, the Council directed Staff to submit applications for $56,049 in CDBG funding for FY 1993-94 and for an advance of $7,891 in CDBG funding for FY 1994-95. AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT REPORT (740-60) Management Assistant Barker presented the Staff Report and advised that the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Law extends federal civil rights protection in several areas to people who are Qualified Individuals with Disabilities (QID's). The Act prohibits discrimina- tion in the areas of employment, public services, transportation and telecommunications. Total compliance costs are unknownat this time, however, costs to modify the Dublin Swim Center to meet ADA requirements are estimated at $86,350. Mr. Barker discussed the specific terms used throughout the ADA regulations. Title I prohibits discrimination by employers, including cities, against QID's in all aspects of employment, including hiring, advancement and discharge of employees and benefits. Under Title I, the City of Dublin is required to make reasonable accommodations with regard to the known disability of a qualified applicant. Section 1630.2(p) of the Act discusses accommodations that may impose an undue hardship on the operation of the employer's business. Mr. Barker explained that the processes are being designed to deal With the eventuality of a QID requesting an accommodation. The Board, using the Accommodation Review Process, will determine if an individual is an actual QID and then recommend appropriate accommodations. These actions set the framework for complying with Title I. Mr. Barker discussed Title II which deals with access to services and facilities. The City is required to give priority to those methods that offer services, programs and activities to QID's in the most integrated setting possible. As a requirement of the Act, the City must develop a Transition Plan which must cover structural modifications to achieve program · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · CM- VOL 12 - 70 Regular Meeting February 22, 1993 accessibility. Actual physical barriers to City facilities are the main focus of the transition plan. Staff prepared a draft transition plan which focuses on City buildings and barriers to access services within those buildings. Mr. Barker stated the ADA requires, the City to advertise that we are following the ADA provisions. The ADA also requires that the City furnish appropriate auxiliary aides and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program or activity conducted by a public entity. Where a public entity communicates by telephone with applicants and beneficiaries, TDD's or equally effective telecommunication systems shall be used to communicate with individuals with impaired hearing or speech. Relay systems are considered to be an effective method of communication with the hearing impaired and thus, TDD's are not required at this time. At least one public pay phone at each facility will need to have a volume control installed on the unit, and this activity is currently being coordinated with Pacific Bell. Mr. Barker advised that the next step will be for Staff to compile a comprehensive evaluation of services, programs and other access issues for all City facilities in a document called the "Self Evaluation", which will address accessibility issues in terms of parks, recreation programs and other City services not included in the Transition Plan. Cm. Burton asked if the pool could be given back to the school. Cm. Houston questioned the use of the term "undue hardship". Mr. Barker explained that there is no history to rely on and all the information he has obtained says there is just nothing to go by. It is felt that we should just do our best to make the accommodations. City Attorney Silver stated the law is really so new we don't have anything to go on other than what the law says. Dublin is fortunate that there are very few accommodations that have to be made to City facilities. The size of the City's annual budget and costs of repairs in combination possibly would be considered. Cm. Houston questioned if we have to go the most expensive way to solve our problems. He visited West Point last year, and they solved this by putting in a wooden ramp. Mr. Barker explained that a QID can go to the City to request accommodation. We can compromise by looking at what they are requesting by changing the location of the service, changing the makeup of the program, etc. There are a number of things we can do. There is latitude to come to a compromise. Mayor Snyder stated because of the newness of most of our facilities, he did not feel we were in bad shape. Mr. Barker stated except for the Swim Center. · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · CM - VOL 12 - 71 Regular Meeting February 22, 1993 Mr. Ambrose stated we should not underestimate the areas we may have, however, parks will be reviewed closely under the Self-Evaluation Program. Cm. Moffatt questioned what happens after a complaint is filed under the complaint procedure. Mr. Barker stated we list. the items submitted by a QID in writing. It is then forwarded to the City's Compliance Officer, who would potentially try to provide accommodations. It could go before the Board to discuss possible accommodations. It would then be discussed with the City Manager. Cm. Burton asked how we will be able to tell if a medical condition exists. Will they have to have some kind of medical certificate. Mr. Barker stated it goes even further, to someone who is regarded as having a disability. It covers the whole gambit and gets to a legal question. Cm. Burton stated it sounds as if this is worse than even a back problem. Mr. Barker advised that if there were a serious question downline, we could potentially ask for a doctor's note. Cm. Burton asked if we could just drop the swim program. This seems to be opening a can of worms. They could potentially pit the Federal Government against us. Mayor Snyder responded that once you have done it, you have done it. The swim program is only one program. Mr. Barker advised that they must come and ask the City to make accommodations first before going to the Federal Government. What most disabled people want is simply access to the services. Cm. Burton stated if people can sue the City for almost anything, what is the likelihood that they can use the Federal Government to back them. Ms. Silver stated an individual would have to prove their case. If they go to one of the federal agencies, they would do an investigation. Someone who feels they have been discriminated against has to file a complaint. It is then investigated and if it is totally meritless, all that would be required would be a letter. First of all, a person has to prove they are a QID and then they have to show that we did not make a reasonable accommodation. Cm. Burton asked if we don't pass this and something happens, are we any worse off. · · · · · · · · · · · · · Regular Meeting · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · February 2Z, 1993 Ms. Silver responded yes, the City would be in a worse position legally if the modifications are not made and the facilities are still used by the public. Mr. Rankin stated the other element that this addresses is employment. Federal law requires that we have this in place when we recruit. It goes beyond buildings and things; it is a requirement by the Federal Government to provide services. On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by majority vote, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 27 - 93 APPROVING AN ACTION PLAN IN COMPLIANCE WITH TITLE I OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT and RESOLUTION NO. 28 - 93 ADOPTING A TRANSITION PLAN AS REQUIRED BY THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, TITLE II and RESOLUTION NO. 29 - 93 ADOPTING A COMPLAINT PROCEDURE RELATING TO THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT Cm. Burton voted against this motion. Mayor Snyder suggested that Staff identify the QID and ADA definitions in all documents. * * * EASTERN DUBLIN BUDGET STATUS & REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO SECURE ADDITIONAL FUNDS (600-30) Planning Director Tong advised that the Eastern Dublin Study has been underway since August 1988, which consists of the General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan and related items such as the Environmental Impact Report. There have been five contract amendments thus far to accommodate additional work necessary to complete the study. A sixth amendment is now required to cover costs already incurred by additional studies and costs associated with preparing the final plan and EIR documents. Any future work required by the Council would be in addition to the costs described in the staff Report. The GPA costs funded by property owners - $97,263. The SP costs funded by property owners - $214,460. The remaining SP costs advanced by the City - $79,459. The SP costs advanced by the City would be recovered with interest from future applicants at the time future applications are submitted. · · · · I · · [] · · [] · · I · · · · · · · · · · [] · · [] · · [] · · [] · CM - VOL 12 - 73 Regular Meeting February 22, 1993 Mr. Tong advised that Staff currently estimates that an additional $243,861 in Planning Consulting Services and $15,511 in Legal Services have been incurred for the Planning Commission's recommended plan. These additional costs in 1992-93 are attributable to an underexpen- diture of funds in 1991-92 and costs associated with additional required work since the 1992-93 budget was prepared. Cm. Burton asked when this is going to stop. Who is going to put on the brakes? He asked if there is some control that we have. This has exceeded the budget over and over again. Mr. Ambrose stated this is because the City Council continuously asks for more and more work. He also pointed out that the amount of funds spent last year were not as much as we anticipated. The financial consultant is already $20,000 in the hole. He has indicated he would do no further work unless he got a commitment from the City. Mr. Tong stated the City also received over 750 responses to the Draft . Environmental Impact Report that legally have to be responded to. A considerable amount of time goes into this process. Cm. Burton asked if the project doesn't go through and is turned down, who will pick up the $79,000. Mr. Ambrose stated the City will, unless it is able to somehow recover it from the applicants. Cm. Moffatt asked if these numbers are anticipated costs to conclusion, or just what we owe at this time. Mr. Tong advised that the bulk has already been incurred and it would carry the plan, as recommended by the Planning Commission to conclusion. Mr. Ambrose pointed out that the direction given at the last meeting by the Council is not inCluded in these funds. An analysis was included in the Staff Report. Mr. Tong stated there would probably be about $7,000 more in consultant costs, excluding any additional environmental work. Cm. Houston questioned how a quarter of a million dollars could accrue. Mr. Tong stated the vast majority of the work has already been incurred. The various alternatives that the City Council requested some information on, the consultants did a relatively minimal amount of work, but in-house Staff did the bulk of the work. Mr. Ambrose stated a lot of the work that was done had to be done by a number of sub-consultants. They were involved in responding to the EIR comments. CM - VOL 12 - 74 Regular Meeting February 22, 1993 Cm. BurtOn stated he felt planning consultants have a way of perpetuating their work. He just wanted to be sure we are doing what we can to cut down on what they spend time on. This is beginning to look like projects in the Valley that just get studied to death and never culminate. Mr. Ambrose advised that initially when we let the contract, it was actually for a lot more, but we went back and really ground down the work that was included,. Part of the work had to eventually be done anyway. This has been a long arduous process. Cm. Houston questioned the amount of money to date that has been paid by the landowners. Mr. Tong advised that the total funding commitments through June 30, 1992 are $992,435. Mr. Ambrose stated we are billing and we are getting our money back. Doug Abbott asked about the $79,000 that the City is advancing. Does this represent a prorata share of property owners who refuse to pay at this point. If those properties are not annexed, is the City left holding the bag? Mr. Tong stated the $79,000 is for the Specific Plan portion that property owners in the SP area have decided not to contribute at this point. Mr. Abbott stated he was surprised that the City doesn't have some type of legally binding agreements. Mr. Tong stated we do with some of the property owners. Ms. Silver advised that there is a statute that allows the City to recover costs when properties are annexed. When they apply for any type of approvals, they will have to pay their share of the costs, plus interest. Mr. Abbott urged the City Council to look at this very carefully. Mayor Snyder stated this will be like a domino effect, and once we start annexing, this will be the point of recovery. Cathy Straus stated she had concerns about the $79,000. If the plan gets approved on one property only, she questioned if that particular property owner would have to pay the whole remaining share, even if they had paid their share. Ms. Silver stated the costs are ultimately figured on a per acre basis. Carolyn Morgan stated she had paperwork at home which states that if certain property owners don't like the way the plan is approved, they have a right to change it. Some people are being asked to pay on CM - VOL 12 - 75 Regular Meeting February 22, 1993 property that they don't want included in the plan at all. She summarized by stating she felt this process should have been done years ago. On motion of Cm. Houston, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote, the Council directed Staff to secure from contributing property owners the full GPA sponsor costs (estimated at $97,263) and their individual SP property owner costs (estimated at $214,460) and authorized a City advance of $79,459 to be recovered with interest upon annexation or development approval and authorized an additional appropriation of $243,861 to the Planning Professional Services Account and $15,511 to the Legal Services Account. These costs will be offset by new revenues. Cm. Burton added that Staff should do everything possible to cut down on the costs. OTHER BUSINESS St. Patrick's Day Parade (950-40) Mr. Ambrose reminded the Council that they needed to contact Ms. Lowart as soon as possible regarding their plans for participating in the St. Patrick's Day parade on March 13, 1993. The sponsor of the parade needs the information no later than February 25th. 1993-94 Annual Budget (330-20) Mr. Ambrose requested that the Council check their calendars in order to schedule the annual contract review and budget hearing meetings. He suggested dates of June 15th and 16th. The Council determined that these dates were not workable and the only dates available in June were June 1st and 2nd. Cm. Houston stated he was very anxious to see the spending cuts report, and would like to have this information as soon as possible. Mr. Ambrose stated he hoped to bring the revenue options report back to the Council at the March 8th regular meeting, and he may also have some information on the refinancing of the Certificates of Participation on the Civic Center. He reminded that the Goals & Objectives study session meeting is scheduled for March 23rd. * * * Toll Road (800-30) Cm. Burton stated he had read that ABAG has taken a stand against the toll road. He felt the City should take a step on this to reaffirm its position of being willing to consider this project. CM - VOL 12 - 76 Regular Meeting February 22, 1993 Mayor Snyder stated there were 23 agencies in favor of a resolution that was dropped on the group the night of the meeting by the Greenbelt Alliance. It was a substitute motion that got passed. Airport Protection Area 1060-70 Cm. Burton stated he was for the Airport Protection Area and questioned where this stood at this point. Mayor Snyder advised that the Airport Land Use Commission adopted this and it is policy. There has been a suit filed against it by Righetti. Ms. Silver stated there is no mechanism for an appeal. Mr. Ambrose advised that Pleasanton wanted to instigate a dialogue with~Livermore and Dublin over the protection area. A meeting was scheduled and then it got scrapped. CLOSED SESSION At 9:55 p.m., the Council recessed to a closed executive session t© discuss Personnel (City Attorney Performance Review 640-10), in accordance with Government Code Section 54957, and the status of all Pending Litigation, (640-30) Schaffer; Olympia Drywall; Far West Associates; Dublin Meadows Partners-JL Construction Co.; Siegertsz; Brown; Lamb; Nohr; Corallo; Ross (Miracle Auto); Dolan; Southern Pacific Transportation Co.; and County of Alameda (Measure D), in accordance with Government Code Section 54956.9(c). ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 10:50 p.m. ATTEST: -' % ~ Cit~Clerk · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Regular Meeting February 22, 1993