Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin 03-03-99MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting Wednesday, March 3, 1999 The Ukiah City Council met at a Regular Meeting on March 3, 1999, the notice for which had been legally noticed and posted, at 6:33 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California. Roll was taken and the following Councilmembers were present: Councilmembers Libby, Baldwin, Kelly, and Mayor Mastin. Councilmember Ashiku arrived at 6:36 p.m. Staff present: Assistant City Manager Flad, City Manager Horsley, City Attorney Rapport, Planning Director Sawyer, Senior Planner Stump, and City Clerk Ulvila. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Councilmember Kelly led the Pledge of Allegiance. EMERGENCY REGULAR SESSION AND CLOSED SESSION ITEMS Mayor Mastin advised that the need to take immediate action arose after the agenda was prepared in accordance with G.C.§54954.2(6)(2), Real Property Negotiator, G.C. §54956.8, Property: A.P. Nos. 002-232-01 and 002-282-01, Owner: North Coast Railroad Authority (NCRA), Negotiator: Candace Horsley, Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment. M/S Kelly/Libby to add Emergency Item 10b to the Regular Session and Item 14c to the Closed Session for the above referenced emergency matter, carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Libby, Baldwin, Kelly, and Mayor Mastin. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Ashiku. Councilmember Ashiku arrived at 6:36 p.m. 3.a PROCLAMATION: March 7-13, 1999 as Girl Scout Week in Ukiah Mayor Mastin read the proclamation designating March 7-13, 1999, as Girl Scout Week in Ukiah. Kathy Scotto, Girl Scout Service Unit Director, thanked Council on behalf of the Konocti Girl Scouts and Ukiah Girl Scout Troops. She noted that the Girl Scouts in attendance range in age from kindergarten through high school. The proclamation recognizes their service to the community of Ukiah. Vice Mayor Kelly advised that she is a former Girl Scout. She gave a brief summary of the function of the City Council to the Girl Scouts present, noting that the Mayor speaks for the entire City. The City provides many services to the community by the Fire, Police, Street, and Electric Departments, as well as other services. She invited the Girl Scouts to return to City Hall and learn more about the City's function. 3b. PROCLAMATION: March 14-20, 1999 as Community Concert Week Mayor Mastin read the proclamation designating March 14-20, 1999, as Community Concert Week. Dr. Jeff Rice, and his young daughter, accepted the Proclamation on behalf of the Community Concert Group, their Board and subscribers, and thanked Council for their support. 4a. APPROVAL/CORRECTION OF MINUTES - Regular Meeting of February 17, 1999 MIS Baldwin/Ashiku to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 17, 1999 as presented, carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Libby, Baldwin, Ashiku, Kelly, and Mayor Mastin. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. S. RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION Mayor Mastin reviewed the appeal process. March 3, 1999 Page 1 of 7 6. CONSENT CALENDAR MIS Kelly/Baldwin to approve Items a-g of the Consent Calendar as follows: a. Rejected Claim for Damages Received From Cathy Edmonds and Kathleen McMinn and Referred to Joint Powers Authority, Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund; b. Adopted Ordinance No. 1016, Amending Division 1, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 350 of the Ukiah Municipal Code Regarding City Clerk Compensation; c. Approved Correction of City Council Minutes of October 7, 1998; d. Adopted Resolution No. 99-34, Waiving the 60-Day Notification Requirement for Establishing a County Facility in the City, Pursuant to Government Code §25351; e. Received Report of Acquisition of Computers from Quantex Microsystems In the Amount of $7,619.04; f. Approved Contract for the Preparation of a Site Design Study for Gobbi Street Riverside Park and an Associated Budget Amendment; g. Authorized City Manager to Execute Certification of Local Approval for Project Sanctuary Use of Federal Emergency Shelter Grant Funds. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Libby, Baldwin, Ashiku, Kelly, and Mayor Mastin. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. 7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS No comments received. 9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Consideration of Compensating The Planning Commission With A Monthly Stipend and/or Increasing Their Annual Training Budget Planning Director Sawyer advised that on February 3, 1999, the City Council was presented a survey which related to the compensation of other communities relative to the service provided by the Planning Commission. At that time, Council considered a stipend and/or an increased training budget as a way of showing its appreciation to the Planning Commission, and as a way of paying them for all their.hard work and dedication to the community. The matter was referred to staff to provide Council with additional information. He took the matter back to the Planning Commission and the Commission developed some guiding criteria for the Council to consider. The Commission concluded that both a small stipend and an increased training budget seemed justified. They felt an annual cap, for both training and compensation, should be $5,500. The stipend would be based on $20 per Commissioner, per meeting. It would assume an 18 meeting year, amounting to $1,800. The remaining funds of $3,700 would be the increased training budget. He discussed the matter with the City Manager and they concluded that the request for an increased training budget is very much justified. He reminded Council that the Planning Department budget was reduced significantly two years ago due to budget restraints and the Planning Commission has not been able to attend as many training sessions and seminars as they would like. He advised that he is opposed to the stipend because it involves a matter of fairness to the other committees and commissions that the City maintains. He pointed out, however, that the Planning Commission probably works more hours than the other committees and commissions. He recommended that Council increase the training budget to $5,000, allowing the Planning Commission to attend conferences and training sessions throughout the year, at their discretion, and not approve the stipend proposal. He felt that the Planning Commission was very deliberate and reasonable in their recommendation to Council, and that they are worth a great deal to the Ukiah community. Judy Pruden, 203 Hortense, Planning Commission Chairperson, advised that she takes exception to a portion of the Staff Report related to the "volunteer" issue. She discussed the Planning Commission's obligations to adhere to the Brown Act, Conflict of Interest Disclosure, and other legal matters related to conducting Planning Commission meetings. She felt that the Planning Commission is not like other committees and commissions of the City because they have legal review and make larger decisions that affect the entire City. She thought that $20 is not much to request of the City for a stipend, noting that the Commissioner's make financial sacrifices while serving the City. Motion Baldwin to approve an increase in the training budget for the Planning Commission, in addition to a stipend of $60 per month, with a cap of $6,000 for both March 3, 1999 Page 2 of 7 training and the stipend. Motion failed for lack of a second. Councilmember Ashiku discussed his prior service on the Planning Commission, noting that he appreciates the hard work and efforts of the Planning Commission and is supportive of allocating additional funds for training of the Commissioners. However, he did not support a stipend. He discussed the $5,000 proposed training budget being a significant portion of tax revenue to the General Fund. The training budget can be discussed further during the budget sessions at a later date. He was supportive of allocating an additional $833, which is the prorated share of the proposed $5,000 annual training budget, towards Planning Commission training for the remainder of the fiscal year if there were training opportunities available. He felt that the decisions that the Planning Commission makes are important and it is equally important that they be adequately trained. Planning Director Sawyer advised that there are many opportunities available for training on planning issues throughout the year. He felt that the addition of $833 towards training for the remainder of this Fiscal Year would provide a number of training opportunities for the Commissioners. He noted that some of the seminars are held in Southern California cities, and therefore, travel allowances are a consideration. He felt that the current budgeted amount of $2,500, in addition to $833, would provide a credible amount of training for the remainder of the current fiscal year. Councilmember Libby advised that she appreciates the time and work that the Planning Commission donates to the City and is supportive of training for the Commissioners. Council approved a budget of $2,500 to Commissioners to attend the Planning Institute, however, she has not seen much interest in the Commissioners wanting to attend. In fact, as of their last meeting, only one Planning Commissioner had voiced an interest. She felt that the remainder of the training budget, $1,250, be appropriated towards training for the remainder of this fiscal year with the types of training being left to the Commission's discretion. She would like to see the expenses quantified and receive more data on the matter in order to allow Council to make the appropriate decision during the budget sessions for the next fiscal year. City Manager Horsley discussed that matter of location of seminars, noting that some seminars are held in nearby cities, such as Santa Rosa or San Francisco, which would require a day trip, in addition to registration costs. Seminars that are held in cities farther away, such as Sacramento or Santa Barbara, would require an overnight stay in addition to registration costs and travel expenses. She stressed the importance of placing a spending cap on training funds and advised that, when training opportunities arise, she will confer with Planning Director Sawyer and make recommendations to the Commission regarding availability. Planning Director Sawyer advised that the Planning Commission intends to use the funds which have been budgeted for their use for the remainder of the fiscal year. He reported that the four Planning Commissioners who had previously attended the Planners Institute felt that it would be redundant for them to attend this year due to learning opportunities received from other sources since last attending the Institute. All of the Planning Commissioners were enthusiastic about training opportunities during the remaining of the fiscal year. He will continue to inform the Commission when training opportunities become available. MIS Kelly/Baldwin approving an additional $833 to the Planning Commission budget for the remaining of this fiscal year for training purposes. Mayor Mastin advised that he is supportive of an increase in the budget for training purposes, however, he expressed his concern with a stipend. He felt the City should compensate Commissioners for expenses related to mileage, phone calls, etc. He discussed volunteerism and expressed his concern that all commissions and committees of the City be treated equally. He felt that the Planning Commission may require more training than other committees of the City, however, all committees contribute an amount March 3, 1999 Page 3 of 7 of time each month for the betterment of the community. He was of the opinion that other committees and commissions of the City may need training as well. When looking at a stipend, all commissions and committees should be taken into consideration. Councilmember Libby advised that a stipend is contrary to the spirit of volunteerism and that all committees and commissions of the City should be treated equally. It would be difficult to give to one and not another. Councilmember Baldwin felt a stipend is a statement of the commitment by the City to high quality planning and is an important message to send to the community. When the Planning Commission does a good job, fewer planning matters will come to the City Council for consideration. He supported training for the Planning Commissioners and felt it would allow them to make quality decisions and become less dependent upon Staff recommendations. He felt it would be an important gesture of the City's commitment to planning if Council would consider the matter of a stipend in the future. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES' Libby, Baldwin, Ashiku, Kelly, and Mayor Mastin. NOES: None. ABSTAIN' None. ABSENT: None. 8. PUBLIC HEARING 8a. Plannin_o De_oartment Fee ~chedule Amendment For Demolition Permit Review Planning Director Sawyer advised that on December 2, 1998, the City Council adopted an ordinance which requires discretionary review of certain demolition permits associated with potentially significant historical, architectural, or cultural resources. Discretionary review of such permits require that the City conduct environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and requires that such projects be publicly noticed for a hearing before the City Council. These activities cost money in terms of staff time, newspaper noticing, and filing fees, and, in keeping with City policy relative to other planning and building permits, it would be advisable to recover these costs by charging a fee to process relevant demolition permit applications. He recommended the Planning Department Fee Schedule be amended to include a minimal fee of $225 for processing discretionary Demolition Permits. This would make demolition permits akin to the lesser of the fee requirements, such as Minor Site Development Permits and Minor Use Permits, which is currently set by a past Council action at $225. He reported that the Planning Department averages one or two Demolition Permit applications per year. 7:10 p.m. - Public Hearing Opened. No comments were received. 7:11 p.m. - Public Hearing Closed. MIS Baldwin/Kelly to approve Resolution establishing fees to process Demolition Permits requiring discretionary review and approval. Councilmember Libby advised that one of the reasons why she voted against the Demolition Ordinance was because of anticipated increases in costs. She advised that it wasn't until she read an article in the newspaper yesterday that she became aware that the fee is being increased from $45 to $225 for the permit. She discussed whether to charge the applicant $225 or to absorb the cost in the General Fund. She inquired if there is a bare minimum that could be charged to lower the fee to the applicant. Planning Director Sawyer advised that in 1996 when the fee schedule was revised, there was a decision made by staff and the City Council that the City would only be recovering a portion of its costs on any given planning permit. The fee of $225, which is similar to a Site Development Permit, and based upon results of the fee study derived in 1996, would imply that $225 would recoup only a portion of the total costs. He reported that, when comparing the City's fees to other agencies, such as the County of Mendocino, the City's fees are very Iow and the City has become developer friendly with regard to fee amounts. Previous demolition permits were simply a Building Permit that was ministerial in nature except for unique projects, such as St. Mary's Church. These permits allowed the Building Inspector to follow the process of his job and did not include other concerns that relate to March 3, 1999 Page 4 of 7 discretionary review which involve the Planning Department. At that time, there was no fee for a discretionary permit or planning fee, however, the minimum charge for a Building Permit is $45. The Building Inspector would make sure that the building came down safely and that nearby properties were not damaged. Councilmember Ashiku expressed his concern that the proposed Resolution would burden citizens with additional expenses, even though their home may not qualify as historical under the Ordinance. He felt it is a public benefit to have historical structures protected by a Resolution, however, he was opposed to holding the public at bay for the demolition of a structure that did not qualify as historical. He was of the opinion that two projects per year would not financially impact the Planning Department. It was his opinion that demolition of structures, which are not historical in nature, should not have to pay $225 and be processed in the same way as those that require additional process due to their historical significance. Councilmember Baldwin discussed the matter of government subsidies, and felt that the City should recoup it's costs from an individual to compensate for staff's time in processing the permit. City Attomey Rapport advised that the Ordinance process requires the application to be reviewed by the Demolition Review Committee first, and they make a recommendation to the City Council. If the Committee recommended that the building did not have historical significance, the amount of CEQA review and other requirements would be substantially less. There would still be noticing requirements, which would cost approximately $50. He proposed a two-step fee whereby, if the Committee recommended the structure was not historically significant, the applicant would be charged a minimum fee to cover the basic costs, however, if the Committee recommended the structure was historically significant, then the applicant would pay the higher fee for the full process. He noted that currently, if a building is 50 years old or older, the process requires a public hearing. Discussion followed concerning the City Attorney's analysis of a proposed two-tiered fee schedule for Demolition Permits. There was also discussion concerning CEQA guidelines and environmental review of demolition permits for structures over 50 years old which are considered historically significant. An hourly rate was also proposed, but it was noted that it would require a large accounting task to determine rates. City Attomey Rapport recommended not continuing this Public Hearing because if a new schedule is proposed, a new report would need to be available for 10 days prior to the hearing. He recommended staff reschedule the matter on a future agenda. MIS Baldwin/Kelly to withdraw the motion. Planning Director Sawyer advised that a new proposed fee schedule would be sent to those who have expressed an interest in the matter. Further discussion followed concerning the public's concern with the increased cost of fees, historical projects, and the difficulty of not burdening the general public with various permit requirements. Differentiating between a historically significant structure and an older structure without historical significance was a concern of all Councilmembers. Consensus of Council was to refer the matter back to staff for further analysis and to develop a tiered fee schedule for Demolition Permits considering historically significant structures versus those that are not historically significant. 10. NEW BUSINESS a. Discussion and Possible Recommendations on the Proposed Mendocino County Water Aqency Manager Position City Manager Horsley reported that at a workshop on July 15, 1998, the Board of Supervisors asked staff to assess the merits of reorganizing the Mendocino County Water Agency and establishing a position to deal with water development issues. The Water Agency is staffed by one full-time hydrologist who worked mainly on water quality issues throughout the County. Due to the many topics which have come before the City Council March 3, 1999 Page 5 of 7 and the Board of Supervisors over the past few years, it was felt that a position could be created to assist with expertise and provide analysis for many of these situations. The position would also provide expertise to the Coastal areas which are looking for alternative water sources. Currently the County, the cities, and the Water District rely heavily on the Sonoma 'County Water Agency for their expertise. She discussed recent recommendations by the Sonoma County Water Agency regarding the Potter Valley Project. She discussed the job description for the position and noted that workshops have been held to receive public input on this position. County Administrative Analyst Sue Goodrick has provided the City with copies of minutes of these public meetings as well as correspondence and documents generated since the December Board meeting. She discussed the Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission (IWPC), noting it is the first time in its history that all water agencies in the valley have worked cooperatively together on these water issues. The IWPC has hired an attorney to represent all of the agencies on the Potter Valley Project. The new position could provide expertise and assist with some of the water issues of the IWPC. Councilmember Baldwin advised that the largest controversy regarding the new position is whether or not they will spend most of their time searching for new sources of water, and very little time concerning the quality of the water in reservoirs and rivers. He felt the position should be concerned with both the quality as well as the quantity of water sources. Consensus of Council was supportive of the Mendocino County Water Agency General Manager position where quality is as important as the quantity of water. 1'1. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Councilmember Libby had nothing to report. Councilmember Baldwin had nothing to report. Councilmember Ashiku reported on the status of the RFP for LAFCO's new Executive Officer. He noted the interview scheduled has been set, a decision should be made by April 14, 1999, then referred to the Board of Supervisors. Councilmember Kelly reported attending the weekly meetings regarding the joint grant application between the Mendocino County Mental Health and Sheriff's Departments. The purpose of the grant is to create a mechanism whereby mentally ill offenders can be evaluated for the influence of their mental health status and be put into a program of intensive case management so that they do not continue to run afoul of the law because they have a mental illness. Police Chief Williams has been involved in assisting to design the training component of the grant program. Mayor Mastin had nothing to report. 12. CITY MANAGER/DIRECTOR REPORTS City Manager Horsley reported that the RFP for the preparation of the final closure and post maintenance closure of the landfill has gone out. Staff met with Community Air on Monday and a memo was distributed to the Councilmembers concerning the results of that meeting. Staff is working towards bringing back a lease agreement to Council by March 17, 1999. She reported that Councilmember Baldwin has asked for a discussion of the City's primary distribution outages and the number that is underground verses overhead. She distributed the report to Council. Timeline maps have been received for the completion of the garbage transfer station.. She met with EBA Wastechnologies and Ukiah Solid Waste today regarding the timelines. They have been working with the Mendocino County Planing staff and have done an excellent job. Both she and Mayor Mastin will be attending a meeting with interested parties this week to discuss the possible extension of the closure date of the landfill to October 2000. The timeline shows a closure date of September 10, 2000, but with possible delays, it is estimated that the date could be extended to October 2000. March 3, 1999 Page 6 of 7 10b. Discussion and Possible Action Concerning: Property: A,P. Nos. 002-232-01 and 002-282-01 Owner: North Coast Railroad Authority {NCRA) Bruce Richard, MTA General Manager, advised that the Ukiah Transit Station Project is currently on a course for closing a deal which would remove it from the foreclosure efforts of the City of Willits. He reported that there is no guarantee that their arrangement with Willits will be completed or closed, noting that the City of Ukiah and MTA have no control over the matter. Circumstances beyond their control could cause them to loose the property to some other buyer, and therefore, close the opportunity to build the Transit Center. The proposal he submitted to Council for consideration in Closed Session would avoid that possibility and could put the City of Ukiah and MTA in some control for some investment of City money. He advised that MTA's current arrangement is that they would contribute $70,000 and receive a first deed of trust for the property. 7:52 p.m. - Recessed. 8:00 p.m. - Reconvened 13. CLOSED SESSION 8:00 p.m. - Adjourned to Closed Session. a. G.C. §54956.9 (3)(c) - Conference With Legal Counsel Anticipated Litigation, 1 matter No action taken. b. G.C. §54956.8 -Conference With Real Property Negotiator Property: Animal Shelter Negotiating Parties: City of Ukiah and Mendocino County Negotiator: Candace Horsley Under Negotiation: Terms and Conditions No action taken. c. G.C.§54956.8 - Conference with Real Property Negotiator Property: A.P. No. 002-232-01 and 002-282-01 Owner: North Coast Railroad Authority (NCRA) Negotiator: Candace Horsley Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment No action taken. 10b. Discussion and Possible Action Concerning: Property: A.P. Nos. 002-232-01 and 002-282-01 Owner: North Coast Railroad Authority (NCRA) No action taken. 14. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 10:02 p.m. Marie Ulvila, City Clerk March 3, 1999 Page 7 of 7