Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-08-1991 Adopted CC MinutesREGULAR MEETING - July 8, 1991 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Monday, July 8, 1991, in the Council Chambers of the Dublin Civic Center. The meeting was called to order at 7:32 p.m., by Mayor Snyder. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Burton, Howard, Jeffery, Moffatt and Mayor Snyder. ABSENT: None. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Mayor led the Council, Staff and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. DEMONSTRATION OF DEFIBRILLATOR EQUIPMENT (520-70) Dougherty Regional Fire Authority Chief Ritter announced that it was his pleasure to introduce a new program which started in Dublin last week. One and one-half million heart attacks occur in the United States each year; 60% of the people could be saved if they are shocked within 4 minutes. Four to 12 minutes is a very critical time period. Representatives from DRFA demonstrated the use of the new defibrillator equipment on a dummy. ~.~ The Fire Department advised that while Dublin has not yet had its first save utilizing this new equipment, it is just a matter of time. This tool will save a lot of lives. Concerns re Garbage Rate Increases for Recyclinq (810-30) Ms. Tanya Clark, 7832 Gardella Drive addressed the Council related to the garbage fee increases for the recycling program. She and her elderly mother cut back and began recycling and were able to reduce their waste from a 30 gallon to a 20 gallon can. They feel they are being penalized for economizing. According to her research, there are 5,100 single family homes in Dublin, and the additional charges come to over $22,000. The baskets probably cost almost this amount. When the bins were delivered, her mother, who is classified as legally blind, almost tripped on the baskets which were placed on their front porch. There are also 2,100 multi-family complexes being charged for the program, but the residents don't recycle. She understood that there are some negotiations going on to get the multi-family units onto the program. The disposal company is recycling all this trash plus they are reselling it. She can get approximately $4 for the amount that they recycle each month from just her mother and herself. The disposal company is making over $150,000 each year. CM - VOL 10 - 258 Regular Meeting July 8, 1991 Ms. Clark advised that they are on fixed incomes and it is not fair that their bill has gone from $14.70 to $25.65. She thought they would have a choice and felt this had been taken from her. Mayor Snyder asked Staff to prepare a written response to Ms. Clark separate and apart from the meeting. There are many complexities to the law and he felt Staff could explain some of the intricacies involved. Dublin was actually able to keep the rates down because of some surplus funds. Mayor Snyder requested that Assistant City Manager Rankin respond to this request as soon as possible. Cm. Burton asked whether or not there is some type of a senior program available with some options for seniors that have small amounts of garbage. Request for City to Consider Banning Fireworks (650-60) Ann Henderson, 11673 Amarillo Court addressed the Council with concerns related to the sale and use of so called "Safe & Sane" fireworks. She stated she purposefully waited until after/th~~ July to make this request. Drought conditions have made <{en~ox~ of the Valley. Near the 25th of June, she hangs her head in-n--~l~ame as~_~ Dublin starts selling fireworks. The sheds which we allow to be erected to sell the fireworks are a disgrace. We create policing situations in nearby communities. We attract undesirables who sell illegal fireworks. Even the safe & sane fireworks can be dangerous, so there is always the issue of injuries. The true beneficiaries of the sales are the fireworks company. Even though the opponents had no funds to spend on the election, they came within 174 votes of banning the sale of fireworks. Ms. Henderson congratulated the Lions Club for selling FunnerWorks. Ms. Henderson felt a mixed message was being sent to our youth. She requested that the City Council ban the sale of fireworks and look for other ways for the groups to raise money in the community. Cm. Jeffery stated she felt that it would be a good idea to set up a task force to study other ways for groups to earn money. Cm. Burton stated he wished to correct some of Ms. Henderson's misinformation. There has not been any fires in Dublin in the last 2 years. He felt the City Council could review this, however, and keep an open mind. Mayor Snyder stated he felt that a community group could be formed and this should be agendized. Cm. Jeffery requested that Staff do some research and get some background and facts, as well as some cost information, etc. A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~ CM - VOL 10 - 259 Regular Meeting July 8, 1991 Mayor Snyder also requested that Staff try to determine the level of success of the Lions Club sales. Cm. Moffatt felt the Council should look into this and offer some alternatives to fireworks. Cm. Burton stated the non-profit groups raise about $80,000 to $100,000 by selling fireworks. By a consensus of the Council, Staff was directed to agendize this topic for discussion in a couple of months. CONSENT CALENDAR On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote, the Council took the following actions: Approved Minutes of Regular Meeting of June 24, 1991; Mayor Snyder pointed out a correction in the middle of Page 231 where 1992-92 fiscal year was referenCed. Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 70 - 91 SUMMARILY VACATING A PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT TRACT 2161 AMADOR VALLEY BOULEVARD (670-40) and directed that a copy of the Resolution be recorded with the County Recorder pursuant to Streets and Highways Code 8336; Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 71 - 91 AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE U.S.DEPARTMENT OF LABOR (DOL) AND THE ALAMEDA COUNTY TRAINING AND EMPLOYMENT BOARD (ACTEB) 710-60/600-40 Accepted the City Treasurer's Investment Report for Period Ending June 30, 1991 (320-30); Awarded Copier bid (equipment, maintenance & supplies) to C.G.Inc., (350-20) and directed Staff to issue appropriate purchase order (Copier-S8,169.45, Maintenance & Supplies-S1,960.33); Approved Warrant Register in the amount of $981,841.04 (300-40). Cm. Moffatt requested that the item related to sharing business license computer information with DSRSD be pulled from the Consent Calendar for discussion. He questioned if this is public information. Finance Director Molina advised that the information contained on the application itself is considered to be public information. CM - VOL 10 - 260 Regular Meeting July 8, 1991 Cm. Moffatt stated he had no problem sharing information, but could see a time in the future when retail and other businesses might want the information and the City would get into a situation of selling lists. It could become important to sales people. He asked if some kind of policy had been developed regarding fees for this type of information. Fees could be turned back into the program to reduce some of the fees to the businesses. Mr. Ambrose advised that the fees charged to DSRSD are what it costs the City to provide the information. People can come in and look at the business license information applications. They can request information that we have, in the format that we have it. We do not have to produce special reports listing the information. Cm. Moffatt asked if a non-public type business could come in and request this information at the same price. Mr. Ambrose stated this was the reason for the agreement with the District. The City is not required to create records. Mr. Molina stated the City has provided some very basic lists to people which includes the names and addresses of the businesses. information is already in the system. We provide no information regarding income or cash flow. The City also has sales tax information, but cannot provide this to anyone by law. This Cm. Burton questioned what information we would be giving DSRSD. Mr. Molina advised that we would be providing basic information related to name and address and number of employees and any potential hazardous materials storage. Cm. Burton questioned why'the District needed to know the number of employees. Bob Beebe, General Manager of DSRSD responded that they use this information to make sure that the property is used the way the connections say it was to be used, There have been cases where warehouses were used incorrectly. Cm. Burton stated he was nervous about this. Businesses that have been here for 15 or 20 years are now being required to make various changes. He stated he is getting a lot of calls related to this and also expressed concern regarding the fact that this started out as a business registration and is now being called a business license program by the City. On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Jeffery, and by majority vote, the Council authorized the Mayor to execute an agreement to share business license information with Dublin San Ramon Services District (600-40). Cm. Burton voted against this motion. Cm. Burton requested that the item related to designating urban growth to cities be pulled from the Consent Calendar for discussion. CM - VOL 10 - 261 Regular Meeting July 8, 1991 Cm. Burton stated he would like further information on this. Mr. Ambrose advised that we are talking about growth in unincorporated areas being controlled by counties. What this resolution supports is the fact that all development should be included in cities. Cm. Moffatt explained the concept that for any area to grow, we are asking that it be within a city. Cm. Jeffery felt that if counties are hurting for money throughout the state, they will go out and put in retail centers and cities have to provide services. If cities have to provide services, the development should be in the cities. This will force counties to quit stalling on annexations. Cm. Burton felt this would create strip annexations. He discussed the point that if this had been in place 10 years ago, Dublin could now be just a part of Pleasanton. Marjorie LaBar encouraged the City Council to adopt the resolution. People living in unincorporated areas have lousy services. Schools are almost impossible. Once a county skims off the development fees, they then leave it to the cities to fix it. This is a piecemeal approach and she felt there were serious problems in the Los Positas Valley. Counties have a cavalier attitude and she preferred that they not be allowed to take it out of cities hides. On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Jeffery, and by majority vote, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 72 - 91 DESIGNATING URBAN GROWTH TO CITIES (140-20) and directed the City Clerk to send a copy of the Resolution to the East Bay Division of the League of California Cities and to the League of California Cities for consideration of adoption as League policy. Cm. Burton voted against this motion. CONSIDERATION OF APPLYING TO STATE FOR CREATION OF A NEW AGENCY TO ADMINISTER JOB TRAINING PARTNERSHIP ACT (JTPA) FUNDS 710-60 Assistant City Manager Rankin advised that Mayor Ball of Fremont is requesting a commitment on the part of cities in southern and eastern Alameda County to file an application to form a new agency to administer JTPA funds. The City of Fremont is concerned about the current administration of JTPA funds under the auspices of Alameda County. CM - VOL 10 - 262 Regular Meeting July 8, 1991 Mr. Rankin advised that the application must be filed no later than August 1st. The City of Fremont has estimated the cost at $5,500 and proposes that it be shared on a population basis. If the application is approved, additional costs would be incurred to become a fully functioning JPTA Administration. Dublin's costs were estimated to be $660. Mr. Rankin stated that if the Council approves this request, Staff recommended that a future report be prepared on other costs associated with the establishment of a new JTPA prior to proceeding further in the process. Cm. Moffatt who has served on the ACTEB Board of Directors stated that Mr. Rankin gave an excellent description of what is going on. The amount of money at this time would be a percentage based on population rather than an equal split. Also, the amount is a cap which they will not exceed. The job markets are expanding~ out here and he felt it behooves us to get more input into the type of training and education that goes into this particular organization. Right now, there is no direct City participation. Cm. Jeffery stated she was concerned that Fremont might contract with a former ACTEB employee that she did not wish to name. She felt we do have a direct representative in our County Supervisor. It is expensive to set up a board and she did not feel that it would bring back that much to the Valley. She thought that perhaps all the cities on this side of the hill would be better to form a group. Cm. Moffatt stated this is not likely to occur as you need a minimum of 200,000 population to form a group. Cm. Burton felt we could look at joining with San Ramon and Walnut Creek. Cm. Moffatt advised that we could even consider joining with San Joaquin County. Last year's budget was discussed and Cm. Moffatt advised that of a $3 million budget, we got about 12%. Cm. Burton stated he wanted to review what happened with ACTEB before. Berkeley wouldn't cooperate so they gave it to the County. We now have a bureaucracy that Will stay in existenCe regardless of what we do and he stated he was inclined to resist setting up another bureaucracy. We will just be chasing after federal monies. Cm. Moffatt stated we would not be chasing federal money, but rather it is the other way around. They are spending federal money. ACTEB was self-sufficient and was fully funded by the government. The concept is to have the business community leaders and City leaders who meet together and form the concept of taking the disadvantaged folks and bring them into the main stream. They work toward taking people off welfare. CM - VOL 10 - 263 Regular Meeting July 8, 1991 Cm. Burton stated it wasn't necessary to try and sell the program. His concern was related only to who runs it. Cm. Moffatt stated Berkeley will have to either go with the County or this new group. Fremont will go ahead with this regardless, and just want us to join them. Cm. Burton questioned what the City's obligation would be if it gets into this. Mr. Rankin advised that if the Council desires to participate in the application process, once the State makes a ruling, Staff would come back with further cost information and details. The $660 figure is based on their estimate of $5,500 and was the mix assuming they get the necessary 200,000 population participation. Cm. Jeffery asked what if the State says yes, but the cities don't want to participate? What happens? Will Fremont go ahead? She stated she felt that Pleasanton is not necessarily agreeable to this. Cm. Burton asked if pursuing this would preclude us from joining another group such as with Contra Costa County. Mr. Ambrose stated he did not think so. He felt that Fremont is close to forming theirs. We are currently in the County's program and at present, this is the only other alternative situation we have. Mr. Rankin clarified that this program would not be in place for the current fiscal year. Cm. Moffatt advised that wherever there is 200,000 population, there could be a SDA. Mr. Rankin advised that the County's funding would be adjusted downward if cities go with a new SDA. Mayor Snyder felt this is a worthwhile program. The County got involved to handle 20 or so employees they didn't know what to do with. They preserved 20 jobs in the County for their own purposes. On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Mayor Snyder, and by majority vote, the Council authorize Staff to proceed with the concept of joining in the application process with the City of Fremont. The Council also authorized a budget transfer of $660 from the Contingent Reserve. Cm.'s Burton and Jeffery voted against this motion. EAST DUBLIN STATUS REPORT (420-30) Mr. Ambrose presented a brief history and overview of the events related to the East Dublin Study. On June 26th, the County presented a request to consider mixed uses on the Santa Rita property and indicated a willingness to renegotiate the annexation agreement, CM - VOL 10 - 264 Regular Meeting July 8, 1991 including the revenue/cost sharing formula. The plan originally called for a 600 acre business park on the County property. Staff explained that incorporation of mixed uses on the County property could be beneficial to both the City and the County. It would facilitate a better jobs/housing balance, create less traffic congestion and reduce traffic mitigations. Because of the County's proposal to renegotiate the annexation agreement, the City now has the opportunity to reconsider the direction of the East Dublin plan. Staff advised that it was anticipated that a revised work scope could be completed within 2 months. The greatest unknown is the length of time it will take to come to agreement with the County on the basic land use concept for the Santa Rita property. The target completion date of February 24, 199/~was being extended by 3 weeks. It is anticipated that a joint Commission/Council study session would be held in August to discuss selected issues including park relocations, reconfiguration of land uses around Tassajara/I-580, and the effect of mixed uses on the Santa Rita property. The costs to incorporate revisions was estimated at $47,600. Mr. Ambrose stated that because of past dealings with the Board of Supervisors, it is important to get political feedback and make sure they understand what this renegotiation means. There is substantial benefit to us to come up with a better plan of considering a mixed use concept on the County property and integrate the County land uses with the rest of the program. This gives us an opportunity to do this. This also gives us an opportunity to more accurately incorporate the park and recreation masterplan into the program. Cm. Burton stated he agreed that this would be to our benefit, but he wanted to talk strategy. Last year, it was promised that they would come through. Why are we paying one half of the cost when they were the cause of the extra expenses. They could easily delay the process. If we proceed, they could come in later, even though it will cost more. He was upset that we are blowing the $10,000 that was put in the Contingent Reserve and are only 8 days into the new fiscal year. Mr. Ambrose stated they could come to us and request a change in the tax sharing agreement apart from looking at land uses. Their consultant is advising them on how to negotiate with the City. We are now getting someone to help us negotiate who provides services, how best to provide them and who pays. This could be more favorable than what we currently have. While there is some risk involved, the other risk is proceeding and then coming up with a plan that we can't implement. Park recommendations still have to be incorporated into the East Dublin plan. This was not in the original plan with WRT. There is no question that the Board could ultimately say no. The County Administrator understands this. This is why we want to send a letter to the Board of Supervisors to get their willingness. There is no doubt that there are risks involved. Cm. Burton pointed out that if .we go ahead and they want a change, they could respond on their own. A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~ CM - VOL 10 - 265 Regular Meeting July 8, 1991 Mr. Ambrose indicated we could keep the business park as an option in the EIR. On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by majority vote, the Council authorized Staff to send a letter to the County indicating the City's willingness to review the proposed mixed use land use concept and revised tax exchange agreement and to work toward the successful renegotiation of the annexation agreement. The letter should also request a reply from the County indicating their willingness to fund the additional costs outlined in the Staff Report. Staff was also directed to proceed with negotiations regarding land uses on the Santa Rita property and potential amendments to the existing annexation agreement between the City and the County. Cm. Burton voted against this motion. John DiManto questioned if this was a public hearing. Mayor Snyder advised that it was not a public hearing, but the Council would certainly allow anyone to speak on the subject. Mr. DiManto, representing the Dublin Land Company, owners of 82 acres stated he wished to express several concerns. He wished to address impacts to the land owners versus the County property. If the City Council is dealing with the County as land owners related to negotiating, there exists a very aggressive developer for a joint venture there is a possibility that they will give a wish list to the County to discuss with the City. This could possible be a conflict of interest on the part of the City. Unfortunately, this plan has gone on and on and on. To further delay by allowing the County to come in this late will impact this process. As a result, the land owners have had to put up another $150,000. The City seems to be interested in an extension and the City now comes in as a partner in the plan. He suggested that the City go forward with the plan and the County can come back in 2 or 3 years and renegotiate. Dublin could loose some major retailers which could be devastating to the other landowners. He suggested that a decision be delayed for 2 weeks. What we see coming from the County is not what we will eventually get. He felt this action would cause another year's delay. Mr. Ambrose advised that we are not renegotiating infrastructure, but costs of services and operating revenues. Any agreement that the County has with the developer cannot be consummated alone with the developer. The City must be part of these. Tonight's action deals only with the tax sharing agreement and if anything, this should reduce the costs to the other property owners. Mr. DiManto stated if you are dealing with the County and they maintain ownership for 3 years, there would be no problem; however, there will be a developer coming to the study to negotiate and who could ask for high density, etc. They can sway the share of bonds on their property. A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~A~ CM - VOL 10 - 266 Regular Meeting July 8, 1991 Bobble Foscalina indicated that she had suggested at past meetings that Dublin stop or delay the process. Dublin is spending tax dollars and Staff time as well. The County property is.such an integral part of the East Dublin area it should be planned first. It ties existing Dublin with the eastern area. We should know what it will be before we plan the rest of it. Carolyn Morgan felt that Mr. DiManto obviously seems to know something the others don't. She indicated confusion on mixed use. She questioned the ratio of the County property. It appears that it could save the City lots of money on infrastructure. Since there will have to be an EIR done, why did the County want to pay for one they won't use and which couldn't be validated and have to be redone. Marjorie LaBar stated if you have CEQA problems, your EIR may come to a screeching halt. She felt it would make much more sense to delay for a few weeks and draw the County property in. LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES ANNUAL CONFERENCE (140-20) Assistant City Manager Rankin advised that the League of California Cities 93rd Annual Conference is being held in San Francisco this year on October 13-16, 1991. Each year, cities are given an opportunity to consider resolutions which have policy implications. If the Council wished to have policy issues addressed, it would be necessary for Staff to prepare a draft resolution for consideration at a City Council meeting prior to August 29, 1991, in order to meet the identified League calendar. The League also requires the City to designate the Voting Delegate and Alternate for the 1991 Annual Conference. The Council should either confirm the Mayor and Vice Mayor as Voting Delegate and Alternate or advise Staff of proposed changes. Mr. Rankin advised that the first regular Council meeting in October conflicts with the date of the Conference and Staff requested direction related to rescheduling or cancelling this Council meeting. On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Burton, and by unanimous vote, the Council selected a tentative date of October 10, 1991 to hold the first Council meeting of the month and also reaffirmed the appointments of the Mayor and Vice Mayor as the City's voting delegate and alternate. OTHER BUSINESS DSRSD Liaison Meetinq (110-10) Mr. Ambrose stated that DSRSD wished to set up another liaison meeting. Cm. Burton and Mayor Snyder indicated a preference to meet on July 15th at 3:30 p.m. CM - VOL 10 - 267 Regular Meeting July 8, 1991 Interviews of Tenant Commissioner on DHA (110-30/430-90) Mr. Rankin advised that there are 5 people interested in the Tenant Commissioner position at Arroyo Vista. Cm.'s Burton and Moffatt had previously agreed to serve on an interview panel. A meeting was scheduled to conduct the interviews on July 24th at 1:30 p.m. Light Rail Assiqnment by San Ramon (1060-60) Cm. Moffatt passed out proposed tentative light rail assignments as proposed by the City of San Ramon. Reference Name of East Dublin (420-30) Cm. Burton expressed concern over the fact that'when we first started studying the East Dublin area, we did not want to get a town separated. A small "e" was discussed, but Staff continually puts in a capital "E". This gives a designation as a separate entity. He questioned if the Council had any feelings about this. Cm. Moffatt suggested that it be referred to as the eastern extension of Dublin. CLOSED SESSION At 9:45 p.m., the Council recessed to a closed executive session to discuss Personnel (700-20) in accordance with Government Code Section 54957. Mayor Snyder advised that Government Code Section 54957.6 was also added to the closed session discussion. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the COuncil, the meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m. -- ~ ~ ~i~y Clerk CM - VOL 10 - 268 Regular Meeting July 8, 1991