Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-26-1992 Adopted CC MinutesREGULAR MEETING - October 26, 1992 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Monday, October 26, 1992, in the Council Chambers of the Dublin Civic Center. The meeting was called to order at 7:37 p.m., by Mayor Snyder. ROLL CALL & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLA~ PRESENT: ABSENT: Councilmembers Burton, Howard, Jeffery, MOffatt and Mayor Snyder. None. CUSTOMER SERVICE AWARD FOR NOVEMBER (150-90) City Manager Ambrose presented the November Customer Service Award to Lou Ann Riera-Texeira. * * * GFOA AWARD ( 150-20 ) Mayor Snyder presented the Government Finance Officers Association Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting for Fiscal Year 1990-91 to Finance Technicians Katie Mooney and Lynn Harringtono * * * CONSENT CALENDAR On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Jeffery, and by unanimous vote, the Council took the following actions: Received the City Treasurer's Investment Report ($16,299,171.$8) as of September 30~ 1992 (320-30); Authorized Staff to begin the process for sale of remnant parcels of property from the Dublin Boulevard Extension acquisitions (670-80); Received the summer 1992 Aquatics Report (950-30); Cm. Moffatt stated he wished to extend accolades to the Recreation Director for all the positive recreational activities the City had last summer. Received the summer quarter 1992 Recreation Report (950-30); Approved Warrant Register in the amount of $575,691.35 (300-40); Recreation Director Lowart advised that the City had received gifts from four members of the community which were directed for use by the Preschool Program and also the Senior Center. CM- VOL 11 - 378 Regular Meeting October 26, 1992 Cm. Burton stated he was glad that this was being discussed as a separate item. He felt gifts from the community shoUld be recognized on the regular agenda. One of the donors was present in the audience and the Council thanked him for his gift to the City. On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Burton, and by unanimous vote, the Council accepted the four gifts from members of the community and directed Staff to prepare formal acknowledgments to the donors (150-70). CORRESPONDENCE FROM DUBLIN SAN RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT REGARDING FUTURE USE OF OLD DISTRICT OFFICES (960-10) Recreation Director Lowart advised that a special consultant for DSRSD has contacted the CitY to determine if the City has use for the facility recently vacated by the District. The facility includes a one-story office building with approximately 4,000 square feet, a steel utility building with approximately 3,200 square feet, and paved parking for 38 vehicles. Ms. Lowart advised that Staff had discussed this and was unable to identify any City uses. Also, the building does not currently meet all the handicap codes. Cm. Jeffery pointed out that modifications would have to be done and there would be costs associated. On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote, the Council directed Staff to respond to DSRSD that the City is not interested in utilizing the old DSRSD facility. NOTICE BY SCHOOL DISTRICT OF INTENT TO SELL A PORTION OF FALLON SCHOOL SITE AS SURPLUS REAL PROPERTY (515-20) Recreation Director Lowart advised that the Business Manager for the· Dublin Unified School District has notified the City of the District's intent to sell a portion of the Fallon School site. The property consists of apProximately 1/2 acre and is currently leased by the Kaleidoscope Activity Center. Cm. Jeffery stated the School District's intent is to allow Kaleidoscope to buy this site. They are a tremendous asset to the community. On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cmo Burton, and by unanimous vote, the Council directed Staff to respond to the DUSD that the City is not interested in purchasing the property. Regular Meeting October 26, 1992 ABAG PLATFORM ON GROWTH MANAGEMENT (140-10) City Manager Ambrose presented the Staff Report and advised that the ABAG General Assembly considered a platform on growth management in the Spring of 1992 and approved 8 of the principles presented. Remaining principles were referred to a study group for the development of recommendations. Since that meeting, a number of groups have been working on suggestions for improving the platform. The Alameda County City Management Association (ACCMA) prepared a comparative analysis at the request of the Alameda County Mayors' Conference. The ACCMA has suggested that a consolidation plan be completed prior to merging any of the single purpose agencies, that consideration be given to whether the functions of a regional body as envisioned can be accomplished under the existing statutory authority of the agencies proposed to be merged, and that a clear conflict resolution plan be developed and included if such a regional agency is formed. Mayor Snyder stated the ABAG Board LG&O Committee had met and made minor modifications which will be available at the General Assembly Meeting on Thursday, October 29th. There were no strong feelings to make major modifications. Cm. Burton questioned if this was a compromise to the Bay Vision 2020 plan with other organizations fighting for their turf. He felt the best features were pointed out on the first page, especially the appointment of 100% local elected officials to regional governing board. Mayor Snyder advised that the bill was defeated by the Senate at the end of the session last year. Cm. Burton questioned the merging of ABAG and MTC. Mayor Snyder advised that if the study shows that it is worthwhile to merge these agencies, there was language added. ABAG is hard pressed for money. MTC holds the purse strings. With the suggested changes made to date, it could be more palatable to MTC. Legislation might be forthcoming° Cm. Jeffery advised that this was also the subject of discussion at the recent League of CA Cities conference. Dave Karp, Mayor of San Leandro will be bringing up a suggestion to have CMA controlled by local government. Thursday will be a confusing day with all the proposals that will be made. Mayor Snyder advised that Air Quality is left out of this discussion because it complicates things too much. They are more of a regulatory body~ Cm. BUrton pointed out that they have a lot of power they haven't used yet. CM - VOL 11 - 380 Regular Meeting October 26, 1992 The Council reviewed the proposals and directed that the City Council's delegate to ABAG convey the City's direction. Cm. Jeffery requested Staff to make reservations for her to attend the General Assembly meeting on Thursday. PROPOSED PLAN FOR EXPENDITURE OF MEASURE D FUNDS (810-30) Assistant City Manager Rankin presented the Staff Report and advised that the settlement of the initial Measure D lawsuit provided for a distribution of certain funds for recycling and/or source reduction activities. It is anticipated that the City will have approximately $80~000 in unappropriated Measure D funds. One proposed expenditure is a one-time rebate of $8.04 in early 1993 to single-family residential garbage customers. Additional monies are proposed to be expended on programs benefiting multi-family and commercial sectors. Mr. Rankin advised that the Boy Scout Christmas tree program needs approximately $1,500 in the current year. This is the estimated cost for a chipper and personnel which is consistent with the level of support given by the City to this program in the past and discussions at the October 22nd special City Council meeting. This would qualify as a source reduction program. If this is added, it will leave $11,478 unappropriated for next year. The unappropriated funds are recommended for use on projects oriented towards the commercial sector. The actual use will be determined by City Council budget deliberations next year. These are 1-time only funds available. Cm. Moffatt asked if these funds can only be used for source reduction and recycling activities. Mr. Rankin responded that this was correct. Cm. Burton asked if the $1,500 for the Boy Scout project will be recorded as a reduction in the percentage to the landfill. Mr. Rankin stated he would be working with Public Works to get an estimate of the quantity° Cm. Burton stated he felt this was very worthwhile. Cm. Moffatt stated he thought in the budget meeting a figure of $2,800 was discussed as being needed by the Boy Scouts for this program. Mro Rankin stated they were able to reduce some of the cost estimates. Mr. Ambrose advised that at the budget meeting, the same person also spoke about the Dougherty Hills Park and this was where the $2,800 amount came in. When asked, Mr° Rankin responded that the Waste Management Authority was not Clear on how long we will be able to carry this amount over. CM - VOL 11 - 381 Regular Meeting October 26, 1992 Mr. Rankin stated that on most of the items, Staff will be coming back with a specific agreement. Dublin is probably the only agency that has proposed a rebate back to the people. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Jeffery, and by unanimous vote, the Council authorized the necessary budget change and additional appropriation and directed Staff to prepare any necessary contracts to implement the expenditure. The City support for a Christmas Tree mulch project was included, with up to $1,500 allotted for this project. ALAMEDA COUNTY CONGESTION MANAGEMENT AGENCY (CMA) DRAFT DEFICIENCY PLAN GUIDELINES (1060-90) Assistant Civil Engineer Sepehri presented the Staff Report and advised that in June, 1990, voters approved Proposition 111, which allowed for an increase in the gas tax of up to 9 cents. In order for the City to receive these funds and the new Federal (ISTEA) funds, local jurisdictions are required to develop a Congestion Management Program. As part of the CMP, local jurisdictions must prepare a Deficiency Plan if the level of service on any segment of the CMP network becomes Level of Service "F". If the LOS reaches "F", legislation provides two options for local jurisdictions to remain in conformance. These options are: 1) implementation of a specific plan such as freeway or road widening to improve the LOS of the congested segment; or 2) implementation of other measures which would result in measurable improvements in LOS on the CMA network and would contribute to an improvement in air quality such as mass transit service, improving or installing pedestrian and/or bicycle paths, etc. The CMP network in the Tri-Valley area consists of 1-680, 1-580 and SoR. 84. Local jurisdictions will have 180 days to provide a Draft Deficiency Plan from the date that CMA staff notifies local jurisdictions of a deficient segment. The CMA then has another 180 days to work with the local jurisdictions to approve or disapprove the local jurisdictions' Deficiency Plan. Cm. Moffatt questioned if the area was defined for which you improve the air quality. Mr. Sepehri stated it has to be in the general immediate area. The Council received the report on the CMA Draft Deficiency Plan Guidelines. CM - VOL 11 - 382 Regular Meeting October 26, 1992 PROCEDURES RELATED TO APPOINTMENTS TO PLANNIN~ AND PARK & RECREATION COMMISSIONS AND SENIOR CENTER ADVISORY COMMITTEE (110-20) City Attorney Silver presented the Staff Report and advised that because a directly elected Mayor makes all appointments to Committees, Commissions and Boards, this will necessitate changing several documents related to said appointments to the Planning Commission, Park & Recreation Commission and the Senior Center Advisory Committee. Ms. Silver advised that the Council should discuss and determine: 1) length of terms; 2) whether term limitations should be removed or remain on the Planning Commission; 3) whether term limitations should be placed on the Park & Recreation Commission and the Senior Center Advisory Committee; and 4) the process by which appointments will be made by the Mayor and confirmed by the City Council. The Council should then direct Staff to prepare revisions to the appropriate documents and schedule a public hearing for November 9, 1992. Cm. Burton questioned why we are trying to reinvent the wheel. There is no evidence of what other cities do which have been doing this for years. This is quite a bit for the Council to decide cold turkey.. They must stop and think of what the consequences are and what problems could occur. There should be tenure on the Commissions° He questioned what Pleasanton, Livermore and Hayward do. City Clerk, Kay Keck explained her understanding of the process that Livermore and Pleasanton uses. Ms. Silver advised that the City of Hayward is a charter city and therefore~ does not follow the same laws as a general law city. Cm. Moffatt stated he brought up before and had a hard time getting the point across that if you appoint somebody, just like if you hire somebody~ there comes a point when they might want to leave. The point then becomes, are they leaving of their own accord, or because the new Mayor wants different direction on the board° He questioned how members would be removed, and if there is any mechanism for this. Ms. Silver explained that because the Mayor makes all appointments~ subject to approval by the City Council, if a term is established and the term of an individual expires, then the Mayor could make a new appointment. Cm. Moffatt questioned if no term is established, how would we know when to replace someone° Ms.' Keck clarified that Cm. Moffatt was confusing terms with term limits. The Council may establish 2 or 4 year terms, and then decide if Commissioners will be limited to a certain number of terms. Ms. Silver advised that currently the Municipal Code places a restriction on the number of terms that a Planning Commissioner can serve to two consecutive four year terms. The question is whether or not the Council wants to continue the restriction on the number of [] I [] I [] [] I · I [] I I I [] ~ [] I [] · I [] I I I I · [] · · I [] I · · [] CM - VOL 11 - 383 Regular Meeting October 26, 1992 terms. The other question is whether the term shoUld be for 2 or 4 years. Cm. Jeffery stated she felt it was very clear that this community wanted the Mayor to only serve a 2 year term. If you have 4 year terms, conceivably we could have a Mayor serve his entire 2 year term and never make an appointment. She suggested that the terms be for 2 years, but without limit. Also, the Council had not discussed other appointments made by the Council. She did not feel these should be ratified by anyone other than the Mayor. The Mayor alone should make those decisions. Cm. Burton stated he would rather see 4 year terms. Perhaps there could be an overlap with staggering. He would hate to see the entire Planning Commission removed every 2 or 4 years. He liked the idea of a sub-committee doing the interviews. Mayor Snyder stated he also felt the terms should be for 4 years. or 3 Commissioners could be up for appointment every other year if staggering were established. He would like to see term limits removed. Two Cmo Jeffery clarified that all the Planning Commission seats will be open in December. Cm. Moffatt questioned if it would be better to have 2 Councilmembers recommend to the Mayor who the appointments should be° Mayor Snyder stated he felt a sub-committee of 1 Councilmember and the Mayor is a very reasonable way to do it. The ultimate decision is the Mayor's, then the City Council can either ratify or deny it° Staff clarified that a simple vote of 3 would be required to ratify an appointment. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Jeffery, and by unanimous vote, the Council established a process for appointment of Planning Commissioners whereby the Mayor and 1 Councilmember will interview those interested in serving. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote, the Council determined that there shall be no term limitations on Planning Commissioners. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote, the Council concurred that nO term limits are to be placed on the Park & Recreation Commission or the Senior Center Advisory Committee. Ms. Silver stated formal motions were not required, because Staff would be preparing the necessary Resolutions and Ordinances based on the Council's direction and bringing them back at the next Council meeting. in [] i I [] [] [] [] ! [] [] II I I ~ II I · [] nl n nl [] [] i lU [] [] ~ [] i · I Ill [] Regular Meeting October 26, 1992 The Council determined that terms will be for 4 years, except for the initial appointments, when 2 people will be appointed to 2 year terms and 3 people will be appointed to 4 year terms. This will cause an automatic staggering of terms to occur beginning in December of 1994. The Council discussed the process by which appointments will be made to the Park & Recreation Commission and the Senior Center Advisory Committee. These appointments will be made in the same manner as for the Planning Commission with no term limitations. The initial appointments shall be 2 people for 2 year terms and 3 people for 4 year terms. The Mayor and 1 Councilmember will interview and the Mayor will make the appointments, subject to ratification by the City Councile The sub-committee will decide which 2 members shall be appointed to the initial 2 year terms and which shall be appointed to 4 year terms. The Council directed Staff to prepare necessary revisions to the various documents.to implement the changes discussed and bring back for adoption following a public hearing at the November 9, 1992, City Council meeting. MULTI-FAMILY RECYCLING PROGRAM (810-60) Assistant City Manager Rankin presented the Staff Report and advised that in order to comply with State mandates related to waste reduction~ a Source Reduction Recycling Element (SRRE) was adopted in March, 1992. The SRRE recycling component identified that the City would implement a multi-family recycling program by 1995. As discussed in the Staff Report, Mr. Rankin reviewed coordination with the curbside program, cost of program, RFP vs. direct negotiation with waste hauler, potential advantage to apartment owners, scope of services, and the draft RFP. Cmo Moffatt asked if Livermore Dublin Disposal takes over this project if the contracts for both multi and single family units would run togethero Mr. Rankin stated Staff had not gotten to this level of discussion related to the term of an agreement. The draft RFP discusses a 3 year termv but Staff ha'd not discussed how a bidder might feel about this. There are 3 years from this coming Spring left on LDD's agreement. Cm. Jeffery stated there are some definite advantages of going with LDD. It would be easier for them to track the waste as they have a system already set up which would be very acceptable. She liked Cm. Moffatt~s idea of trying to tie the terms together. Cm. Burton stated he had been going back and forth on this issue. He was uneasy about a public agency going without an RFP, but his second reaction is who will be responsible for this small amount of trash. Another concern would be the problems you get into with equipment. He didn't know if there is someone already in the business and would like to see what the market is. CM - VOL 11 - 385 Regular Meeting October 26, 1992 The Council questioned frequency of pick up. Mr. Rankin stated the primary service frequency is when you can't get any more in the bin. Staff is looking at the possibility of getting some of the cardboard out. Cm. Moffatt asked if the City is still involved with studying rates. Mr. Rankin advised that the curbside program is outside of the rate structure so it does not go through the same process. On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote, the Council directed Staff to pursue direct negotiations with Livermore-Dublin Disposal for the multi-family recycling program and to try for a 3-year simultaneous program. TAX EXCHANGE AGREEMENT WITH ALAMEDA COUNTY UPON ANNEXATION OF WESTERN DUBLIN (600-40) City Manager Ambrose advised that an agreement has been negotiated between City Staff and Alameda County Staff with regard to the amount of property tax to be shared in conjunction with the consideration and adoption of the Western Dublin General Plan and Specific Plan. The agreement establishes the City and County's share of the 1% property tax for those areas within Western Dublin which would be annexed to the City in the future. Mr. Ambrose stated that at the time the City Council adopted the Western Dublin Specific Plan, the SP included a fiscal cash flow model which projected a cumulative fiscal surplus of $2.974 million for the City upon buildout of the Eden Development in the year 2018. As part of the negotiation process with Alameda County, Economic Research Associates prepared a revised Fiscal Cash Flow Analysis based upon the renegotiated tax share allocations included in the draft tax exchange agreement. This revised report indicates that the revised tax allocation shares will substantially improve the positive fiscal impact of the Eden Development on the City of Dublin. Cm. Jeffery stated this had been a very difficult process and she appreciated the work that Staff had put into it. Cm. Burton had questions related to the open space and stated Staff had done a good job of negotiating and protecting the City's interest. Cm. Moffatt asked if the density goes up 15% is the tax rate renegotiated. Mr. Ambrose stated it is not a matter of increasing the number of units, but rather it is increasing the ratio of single family to multi family units. Regular Meeting October 26, 1992 Cm. Moffatt questioned with regard to the open space areas, if the open space were to be administered by a homeowners association, will the tax rate apply to that land. Mr. Ambrose responded yes, because it will still have an assessed value. On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Burton, and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 123 - 92 APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA REGARDING TAX EXCHANGE UPON ANNEXATION OF WESTERN DUBLIN OTHER BUSINESS Cm. Jeffery Retirement Dinner (610-05) Mr. Ambrose reminded everyone that Linda Jeffery's retirement dinner was being held the fOllowing evening at the Civic Center. DRFA (540-10) Mr. Ambrose advised that there would not be a DRFA meeting held in October o Budget Meeting (330-20) Mr. Ambrose stated he was not sure that the scheduled November 5th meeting date would give Staff enough time to prepare the necessary information. Election (630-30) Cm. Burton questioned when Cm. Jeffery would actually leave office. Ms. Keck responded that Cm. Jeffery would continue to serve until the new Councilmember is sworn in. The Registrar of Voters has almost a month to provide the certification of the election results. It may be that the new Councilmember and Mayor will be sworn in at the second November meeting. CM - VOL 11 - 387 Regular Meeting October 26, 1992 Tri-Valley Transportation Council (1060-40) Cm. Moffatt provided information to the Council related to the Tri- Valley Transportation Council's resolution of interest which talks about State Highway 84 and the fact that we don't make a decision on this until the EIR is done. Cm. Moffatt also discussed the development of a Tri-Valley Transportation Plan. The study suggests that future entitlements comply with local resolutions and ordinances. A fee program is to be developed. The Council requested that Cm. Moffatt provide them with copies of his information. Proclamation for Pleasanton Councilmember (610-50) The Council requested that a proclamation be prepared for retiring Councilmember Butler from Pleasanton. Proclamation for Mary Gibbert's Birthday (610-50) Cm Jeffery announced that Mary Gibbert will celebrate her 80th birthday on November 19th. She would like to see the City do something and suggested that a proclamation be prepared. Statistical Information (420-60) Cm. Jeffery read some statistical information that she recently came across; 99% of all people in the world live under an established or struggling democracy; 73% of the people believe the political system is broken; and finally, if God had intended for us to vote, he would have given us some candidates. Within the next 3 to 5 years, it is anticipated that the power will shift from cities to the state. Heritaqe Center (910-40) Cm. Burton congratulated Cm. Moffatt for getting the Catholic Diocese to agree to the changes in the conditions for use at the old St. Raymond's Church. He questioned what the next step would be. Mr. Ambrose advised that the City Attorney will need to include the revision in the agreement. This is the last roadblock. Regular Meeting October 26, 1992 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m. ATTEST: · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · [] · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Regular Meeting October 26, 1992