Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin 08-06-03 MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 6, 2003 The Ukiah City Council met at a Regular Meeting on August 6, 2003, the notice for which had been legally noticed and posted, at 6:32 p.m. Roll was taken and the following Councilmembers were present: Andersen, Smith, Baldwin (arrived at 6: p.m.), and Mayor Larson. Councilmember absent: Rodin. Staff present: Public Utilities Director Barnes, Community Services Director DeKnoblough, Finance Director Elton, Wastewater Supervisor Gall, Risk Manager/Budget Officer Harris, Personnel Officer Harris, City Manager Horsley, Associate Planner Keefer, Associate Planner Lohse, City Attorney Rapport, Deputy Director of Public Works Seanor, and City Clerk Ulvila. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Colton Kinney, great grandson of Walter Eversole, led the Pledge of Allegiance. Councilmember Baldwin arrived at the meeting at 6:34 p.m. 3. COMMENDATION 3a. Eversole Mortuary's 110th Anniversary Mayor Larson read the commendation presented to Eversole Mortuary in appreciation for 110 years of dedicated family owned business service to the Ukiah community. Walter Eversole thanked the City Council and staff on behalf of the Eversole family. 4. RIGHT TO APPEAL Mayor Larson read the appeal process. 5. CONSENT CALENDAR M/S Smith/Andersen approving item "a" through "d" of the Consent Calendar as follows: a. Received Report Regarding Grace Hudson Museum Securing Services For Classroom Curricula And Collection Cataloging From Keith James and Barbara Muttart in the Amounts of $9,996 and $8,250 Respectively; b. Approved Travel Cost for Citygate Associates; c. Approved Notice of Completion for 2000 STIP Local Street Rehabilitation Project, Specification No. 02-14; d. Awarded Three-Year Agreement in The Amount of $25,281.96 to Evergreen Job & Safety Training to Provide Job and Safety Training to the Electric Department. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Andersen, Smith, Baldwin, and Mayor Larson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Rodin. 6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS Dennis Slotn, Willits, praised the City for the new look at the intersection at Perkins and State Streets. He was of the opinion that there is poor outdoor lighting in the City and Regular City Council Meeting August 6, 2003 Page 1 of 15 requested that the matter be agendize so he could provide a presentation on lighting to the City Council. Susan Knopf, Ukiah, expressed concern regarding lights that emit a glare. 7. PUBLIC HEARING 7a. Consideration and Action Regarding the Appeal of the Plannin_q Commission's Conditional Al~l~roval of the Nix Second Dwellin_~ Unit Usc Permit #03-17 - - - Associate Planner Keefer advised that the Staff Report included points raised by Councilmember Baldwin in his appeal of the Planning Commission's decision and staff's response. He discussed Mr. Nix's project of a second dwelling unit on his parcel in the hillside-zoning district. Three members of the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the matter, and concluded that the second unit was being proposed in a logical and reasonable area that was stable, not highly visible, would not involve vegetation removal, and that could be served by all public services. The Commission conditionally approved the proposal on a 3-0 vote. He detailed how staff arrived at its conclusions. He reviewed a letter submitted by Ms. Bruni Kobbe. He discussed the findings adopted by the Planning Commission as well as the Conditions of Approval for the Use Permit. He noted that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in accordance with Categorical Exemption Section 15303, Class 3a. City Attorney Rapport discussed the CEQA guidelines for a Categorical Exemption. Mr. Keefer explained that Staff could not find any unique circumstances pertaining to the project that would require an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). He noted that the second unit does not require any further disturbance of the soil. Staff's recommended action is to support the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal. Councilmember Baldwin made several inquiries of staff covering the following topics: a vegetation report and herbicide spraying, a 6 inch pipe going into Gibson Creek, old Planning Department reports concerning the original Use Permit of the property, and photos submitted with the Staff Report. Mr. Keefer stated it was his opinion that the vegetation report may have concentrated more on plants that may potentially be disturbed with construction. He explained that the conditions imposed for the Hull/Piffero Subdivision and Use Permit required site and roadway drainage improvements to be inspected and approved by the Public Works Department. He commented on the issue of site preparation and grading techniques, referencing a photograph by Councilmember Baldwin. He stated no additional disturbances have been made or are necessary. Councilmember Andersen posed questions of staff relative to the visual analysis and the proposed height of the building. Mr. Keefer explained that the building is proposed to be 14 feet in height and would be sitting back from the edge of the building pad approximately 25 feet. He noted the Regular City Council Meeting August 6, 2003 Page 2 of 15 farther back the building sits on the pad, the more the view from the valley floor is diminished. He described the location of the second unit, noting the project was not clearly visible from various locations in the valley using binoculars. He noted that as the existing trees mature, they would further obstruct the view of the second unit. He addressed inquiries made concerning the issue of fire protection, stating the fire hydrant on the site is hooked up to the water tank implemented for the Hull/Piffero project. Upon further questioning from Councilmember Baldwin relevant to Mr. Nix drawing water from Gibson Creek, Mr. Keefer explained that it was his understanding that Mr. Nix had received past approval and/or permission to draw water from Gibson Creek, as well as from the Hull/Piffero water tank. Staff has not seen any documentation concerning the drawing of water from Gibson Creek, and therefore, included a Condition of Approval that there be a legal source of water available prior to the issuance of the Building Permit. He continued to discuss the inquiries made by Councilmember Baldwin concerning the Constraints Analysis conducted for the Hull/Piffero project in conjunction with the potential for fire hazards, and the subsequent protective measures implemented. Mayor Larson inquired about original Use Permit 89-49 that allowed for a metal storage building on site. He also inquired about the distance between the primary unit and the second unit, the proposed driveway access, electrical metering, clustered housing developments, and shared infrastructure facilities such as common parking. Mr. Keefer explained that the original application for the Use Permit included a 3,200 square foot storage building. The distance between the primary and second unit is approximately 250 feet. The existing driveway has not been surfaced and there is sufficient area for a fire truck to turn around. The proposed road surface will be an all- weather surface from the primary to the second unit during construction, and then it will be paved. It was his understanding that there would be separate electric meters for the primary and second units, as recommended by staff. Councilmember Baldwin continued to question staff with regard to the average slope, the amount of property to remain in its natural state, and whether the Planning Commission discussed the fact that if more than five per cent is already disturbed, it would be a violation of the Hillside Regulations. He also inquired about the legal use of firearms and hunting within the City limits. Mr. Keefer responded that the average slope is between three to one and two to one for the entire parcel. There is no disturbance required for the second unit. Staff felt that since no additional disturbance is required, it was not necessary to calculate the slope. There is no additional disturbance required with the Use Permit. He advised that hunting with firearms is not allowed within the City limits. Public Hearing Opened: 7:19 p.m. Those that spoke in support of upholding the Planning Commission's decision were: Marlene Weara, Rex Eiffert, Roe Sandelin, Robert Weara, Richard Howland, and Phillip Ashiku. Regular City Council Meeting August 6, 2003 Page 3 of 15 Those that spoke in support of overturning the Planning Commission's decision were: William French and Suzanne Pletcher. Public Hearing Closed: 8:02p.m. Councilmember Smith inquired if Councilmember Baldwin, as the appellant to the appeal of this permit, would be allowed to participate in Council's deliberations and vote on the appeal. City Attorney Rapport noted that, according to the City's Municipal Code, Councilmember Baldwin wouldn't have a conflict of interest. Councilmember Smith complimented staff on the thoroughness of their report and the Planning Commission on their review of the application. He voiced his support of the Planning Commission's recommendation to approve the project. It was his belief that the three Planning Commissioners present during deliberations were very aware of their responsibilities, commitments, and obligations as Commissioners and that Mr. Nix has gone beyond what the requirements called for in preparing the property for development. Councilmember Baldwin inquired of the City Attorney if a precedent is being set by the Planning Commission's approval of this Use Permit in terms of neighboring properties, and if there is a legal argument by neighboring properties since staff argued that there were no cumulative impact for noise and visual impacts, etc. City Attorney Rapport explained that each application is individually considered on its own merits. As far as a cumulative impact analysis is concerned, that would occur under CEQA if this were not a categorically exempt project. Unless a project possesses an unusual circumstance, it could be exempt from that analysis. He explained that, in general, Use Permit applications are suppose to be decided on the record that's presented for the appeal. He recommended the City Council consider the facts of the case before them. Councilmember Baldwin inquired as to the purpose of the black drainage pipe going into Gibson Creek, and whether it is legal under the City's General Plan, the Hillside Regulations, or the State Department of Fish and Game. He also questioned whether the spraying of herbicides along the banks of Gibson Creek is legal according to the City of Ukiah's laws and State Department of Fish and Game. This would also apply to the six-foot high chain link fence that prevents the passageway of wildlife between properties. He noted that the Constraints Analysis Study accepted and approved by the City Council recommends against second units in the hills. M/S Larson/Baldwin to support the appeal and deny the Use Permit for Nix's second dwelling unit Use Permit #03-17 citing the findings of: a. The proposed second dwelling unit is inconsistent with the provisions of the zoning ordinance, as well as with the goals and policies of the Ukiah General Plan; and Regular City Council Meeting August 6, 2003 Page 4 of 15 b. The proposed second dwelling unit is incompatible with surrounding land uses and would be detrimental to the public's health, safety and general welfare. City Attorney Rapport explained that the staff report says that those are the two general findings that the City Council has to make, but Council would also need to make additional specific findings which bridge the analytical gap between the evidence that has been presented and those ultimate findings. It was his opinion that the two findings cited alone would not be legally adequate. Motion Baldwin to amend the motion to include the finding that 1) there was no discussion by the Planning Commission regarding the Hillside Constraints Analysis Study and virtually no discussion at the Planning Commission meeting regarding Section 9139, Hillside Development Standards, in relation to slope, lot size, and percentage of property retained in the natural states, 2) that the Planning Commission failed to support its findings that the second unit will impact positively in any way the General Plan goal of creating more affordable housing while preserving open space and agriculture in the valley, 3) that approval could double the number of new homes in the Study area above 60 to 70 projected according to the Hillside Constraints Analysis, and 4) the development of new homes and future residential use of these homes will substantially increase the risk of fire ignitions in the area according to the Hillside Constraints Analysis. City Attorney Rapport stated the City Council has to make the finding that the approval of this specific project would be detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare of the public. Motion seconded by Councilmember Andersen. Mr. Keefer explained that that while there was no discussion with the Planning Commission about the Hillside Constraints Analysis Study, staff did address the items within the Hillside Constraints Analysis Study and those issues raised by Councilmember Baldwin in his appeal. City Attorney Rapport stated regardless of what the general discussions are about the concern is to determine the potential impacts from second units. The Planning Commission addressed the impacts on each of the developments for this specific project. Mr. Keefer stated that it is his experience and opinion that the overall disturbance of this project would be less than 10 percent of the entire site, and to his knowledge, Mr. Nix has not disturbed any more of the site than what was approved with Use Permit 89- 49. David Hull requested that the Public Hearing be reopened for public comment. Councilmember Baldwin clarified the motion to amend the motion with the additional findings: c) there was no discussion by the Planning Commission of the Hillside Constraints Analysis Study, d) that there was no discussion by the Planning Regular City Council Meeting August 6, 2003 Page 5 of 15 Commission of Section 9139, the Hillside Development Standards that relate to minimum site development standards, average slope to minimum lot size, the percentage of property retained in the natural state, and e) and that the Planning Commission failed to support its finding that the second unit will impact positively in any way the General Plan goal of creating more affordable housing while preserving open space and agriculture in the valley. M/S Baldwin/Andersen to allow the public to comment prior to taking a vote of the City Council on this matter, carried by a unanimous voice vote of the City Council. Public Hearing Reopened at: 8:26 p.m. Those that spoke in support of upholding the Planning Commission's decision were: David Hull, Rick Piffero, Brian Manning, and Rex Eiffert. Daniel de la Peza spoke in support of overturning the Planning Commission's decision. Public Hearing Closed: 8:40 p.m. City Attorney Rapport stated that it is critical that the findings are supported by evidence that's in the record. If Council thinks the project is in violation of the General Plan, there must be facts in the record that relate to this specific project which can be identified as being in conflict or inconsistent with the General Plan. He did not think it is absolutely required that Council identify each detailed fact in the record that would support that statement. Council would at least have to say more specifically how this project would be detrimental and there would have to be facts and substantial evidence in the record to support the statement of why it's detrimental. Motion Baldwin to amend the amendment to the original motion by adding several findings. City Attorney Rapport explained another option suggested by staff in the Report was if Council is inclined to deny the project and make those findings, they provide as much guidance to staff as possible as to support the reasons for believing second units would be detrimental or the belief that it will be inconsistent with the General Plan, allowing staff bring back to Council a set of drafted findings to support that position for Council's consideration. Motion Baldwin in support of the motion, he recommended that staff come back to Council with wording that shows this inconsistent with the Ukiah General Plan goal, Open Space and Conservation-3 "To encourage clustering of residential development wherever possible, to preserve continuous unfragmented natural habitat, the second unit proposal without mitigation of Open Space or trail dedication encourages scattered ranchette style development, without mitigating trail or open space dedication to second unit permit creates a precedent and cumulative impact and makes it more difficult for the City to effect the Ukiah General Plan Open Space and Conservation element (OC- 10.3a,b,c.) relating to trails and open space acquisition. It thought that it is difficult for' the City Council to rely on 14-year-old soils engineering, geology, hydrology, and Regular City Council Meeting August 6, 2003 Page 6 of 15 vegetation reports, and a grading plan. Those are among the reasons why he supports the motion. City Attorney Rapport explained that if staff tries to analyze these findings and try to formulate findings that can be presented to the Council in good faith, and if they can't find the facts in the record to support them, he and the Planning Staff have to reserve the right to report that to Council when they bring the matter back to Council. Mayor Larson clarified that the motion is to amend the motion for denial of the Use Permit. City Clerk Ulvila called for clarification on the motions and was told that there were only two motions on the floor. Roll call vote on the amendment to the motion was as Councilmembers Andersen, Baldwin, and Mayor Larson. NOES: Smith. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Rodin. follows: AYES: Councilmember Councilmember Andersen explained that he is very torn about the issue. It was his opinion that development on the western hillside is not a wise idea for the people in town that have to look at it. He is very skeptical about Staff's claim that there will be little to no visual impact and he felt that geometrical equations are a valid request of Planning Staff and a detailed analysis of what the impacts will be. He stated he would be voting "no" on the motion and hopes that Mr. Nix mends his ways and seriously considers some open space donation or something. He is skeptical about the visibility of the house because the whole house is very visible. Fire safety is very important but for him it's the aesthetics of the hillside that are the most important and that it is one of the defining characteristics of this town. Councilmember Baldwin stated that he believes community rights should be balanced against private rights and vice versa. He spoke to Dave Hull and said that if there were no visual impacts and there were an open space dedication or trail dedication, there should be some give and take on this issue. He reminded Council that Staff has recommended against second units in the hills and that the Constraints Analysis also recommends against second units in the hills. Councilmember Smith stated for the record that he does not feel a need to make a speech or pontificate on the issue and is ready to vote. Motion failed to carry by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmember Baldwin. NOES: Councilmembers Andersen, Smith, and Mayor Larson. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Rodin. M/S Smith/Larson to uphold the appeal of the Planning Commission's actions with regard to the Nix Use Permit #03-17, and carry by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmember Smith and Mayor Larson. NOES: Councilmembers Andersen and Baldwin. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Rodin. Regular City Council Meeting August 6, 2003 Page 7 of 15 The motion failed due to a tie vote and the actions of the Planning Commission remain standing concerning Use Permit #03-17. Recessed: 8:55 p.m. Reconvened: 9:05 p.m. 7. PUBLIC HEARING 7b. Adoption of Resolution Approving the Project Feasibility Study for the Ukiah Northwestern Pacific (NWP) Rail Trail; Mayor Larson explained that rather than Staff making a Power Point presentation, hard copies of the presentation were distributed to Council. Associated Planner Lohse advised that the purpose of this study is to analyze the potential development of a "rail-with-trail facility" for pedestrians and bicyclists along a 1.61-mile portion of the Northwestern Pacific Railroad (NWP) property. It would utilize a 12-foot wide pathway through most of the area and 25 feet from the railroad tracks. Staff has presented the proposal at NCRA's committees for property and they voted to support the project in concept, with City staff returning before the full Board once City Council approval of the Feasibility Study has been obtained. Future technical studies would follow. The total cost of the project as presented is estimated at $1,775,386 and staff is researching funding options for construction of the project. Due to the nature and cost, this project will require a long-term period for implementation and construction. City Manager Horsley emphasized that it will take an engineering study to determine what is needed to construct the project as well as the cost factors. Discussion followed with regard to the Feasibility Study and applying for grants to assist in covering the cost of the project. NCRA's involvement in the project was also discussed. Public Hearing Opened: 9:12 p.m. Suzanne Pletcher and Tim Pletcher spoke in support of the project. An inquiry was made as to whether a trust fund has been established so that the community can contribute toward the construction of the trail. City Manager Horsley explained that the City has signed agreements with the local Community Foundation to establish accounts fro community projects such as the skateboard park. Public Hearing Closed: 9:15 pm Discussion followed with regard to the area the project would encompass in the City limits and the ad hoc committee that is working on the project. Other items discussed included maintenance of the trails, and issues related to litter and crime. Council urged staff to continue to seek funding for the project. It was noted that the Study refers to Regular City Council Meeting August 6, 2003 Page 8 of 15 "Clark Street" and it should be corrected to "Clay Street".' Staff will work with the consultants on errors in the document. M/S Andersen/Smith adopting Resolution 2004-03, Approving the Project Feasibility Study for the Ukiah Northwestern Pacific Rail Trail, carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Andersen, Smith, Baldwin, and Mayor Larson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Rodin. 7. PUBLIC HEARING 7c. Authorization to Submit Annual Grantee Performance Reports, Grant #00- EDBG-738 Risk Manager Harris advised that this is a public hearing for the Annual Grantee Performance Reports (AGPR) for Community Development Block Grant #00-EDBG- 738. This grant was received in 1999-2000 for assistance to the business community for businesses moving into Ukiah and also for those that already existed. The Performance Report includes the actual grant performance report and the Revolving Loan Fund. The grant terminates September 2003 and there was $342,950 available for the loans and $73,300 for the assistance. The City has disencumbered the funds that were setaside in an account with the state because those loans had to be made within the first 24 months and none were made. Public Hearing Opened: 9:30 p.m. No one came forward to address the City Council. Public Hearing Closed: 9:30 p.m. M/S Baldwin/Smith authorizing submission of Annual Grantee Performance Reports for Grant #00-EDBG-738, carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Andersen, Smith, Baldwin, and Mayor Larson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Rodin. 8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 8a. Status Report Regarding Ukiah Skatepark Location Community Development Director DeKnoblough advised that recently Council directed staff to pursue two sites, Low Gap Park and the potential purchase of three parcels located on East Clay Street. An appraisal of the East Clay Street property was completed, however, the property owner has indicated a sale price significantly higher than the appraised value and consequently negotiations have ceased. The primary issue at Low Gap Park is that some of the surrounding uses, particularly the Ukiah Players Theater (UPT) noise intrusion are a concern for the Theater and that there would be conflicting times of use. The UPT has recommended that the Skatepark could be relocated to the other side of the tennis courts where the playground is located. An evaluation of that site for size deemed it inadequate to provide a functional Skatepark and the playground would have had to be relocated. A member of the UPT Board, Jonathan Whipple, has joined the Skatepark Committee and is very enthusiastic about the Park. A representative of the North Coast Railroad Authority (NCRA) identified a portion of the Depot property that may be available for the skatepark. The NCRA Property Committee Regular City Council Meeting August 6, 2003 Page 9 of 15 was supportive of the project however they expressed concern with how the property transfer would be structured, and whether it would be a lease or a sale. They concurred that the property transfer would be a current market value. Staff would put together with the Skatepark Committee and at Council's direction, a specific proposal for the site that would include an actual property configuration and specific proposal for the acquisition or lease of the property. The Skatepark Committee has enthusiastically endorsed the site and is recommending that the City enter into discussions with the Railroad. He inquired if Council considers this site appropriate for the skatepark and if they can provide direction to staff with regard to proceeding with further discussions with the Property Committee. Those speaking in support of the project were: William French and Michael Serfert. Director DeKnoblough explained that the Property Committee has clearance to proceed with the sale or lease of that property. However, it cannot close escrow for the sale of anything that is not owned by NCRA and the title of that cannot be transferred until the escrow closes and the escrow is a 17 year escrow. This time limit is due to the cleanup of the southeastern portion of the property. The property would have to be leased with an option to buy at the end of that period of time if it were to be purchased. He discussed other issues related to the property title transfer. Councilmember Baldwin discussed the amount of property owned by the City in the Low Gap Road area by the tennis courts that is leased to the County. He suggested that the City continue to discuss the possibility of using the playground site and possibly one of the tennis courts to secure the site for a skatepark. Director DeKnoblough discussed the need to locate a skatepark where there is visibility and interaction with other activities for families. Staff would continue to work on both sites and provide information to the City Council. Councilmember Andersen voiced his support of the railroad depot site and proposed that negotiations be moved forward expeditiously. Having the skatepark located downtown provides an economic benefit to the downtown business community and it's located in the center of town. Although the Low Gap Road site is good, it is remote and not centrally located. 8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 8b. Re-scheduling of Wastewater Treatment Plant Preliminary_ Design Workshop Mayor Larson polled Council as to whether they would be available on September 3rd at 4:00 p.m., prior to the regular City Council meeting for the Workshop. Director Barnes advised that County representatives have been contacted and the September 3rd time and date has been verified. Brown and Caldwell will also be in attendance. It was the Consensus of the City Council to schedule the Wastewater Treatment Plant Preliminary Design Workshop for 4:00 p.m., on September 3, 2003. Regular City Council Meeting August 6, 2003 Page 10 of 15 9. NEW BUSINESS 9a. Adoption of Resolution Approving Cooperative Agreement to Provide Funding and Resources for the Development of a Mixing Zone Policy Wastewater Treatment Supervisor Gall advised that very few of the recently promulgated California Toxics Rule (CTR) has established some new criteria for effulent discharges of wastewater treatment plants in the state. Collectively, it appears that very few treatment plants are going to be able to meet these criteria. One possible solution is to have the regional boards allow for dilution of the City's effluent as it enters the receiving water and make it possible for us to sample the receiving water rather than the end of pipe discharges and meet this criteria. Unfortunately Region 1 does not have a policy in place nor the staff or resources to develop the policy. A group of discharges associated with the Russian River Watershed Association collectively have agreed to provide this funding and some resources for the Regional Board to investigate developing a policy. Staff is asking Council's approval to become a member of this group and, in lieu of its fees, act in an administrative capacity as it does with the Russian River Watershed Association now. There was discussion concerning the proposal. It was noted by staff that it might take as much as three years in which to implement. It was noted the new construction of the wastewater treatment plant expansion would still be necessary because the City discharges through its advanced treatment system which is run seasonally and there will be no upgrades to that system. M/S Smith/Andersen adopting Resolution 2004-04, approving Cooperative Agreement to provide funding and resources for the development of a Mixing Zone Policy. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Andersen, Smith, Baldwin, and Mayor Larson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Rodin. 9. NEW BUSINESS 9b. Discussion and Direction to Staff Regarding Changes to UCC Section 1203 City Attorney Rapport advised that currently, Section 1203 of the City Code provides that, notwithstanding, any other provision of this Code, any individual member of the City Council or the City Manager has the right to appeal to the City Council any action taken by an City Commission, board, or Agency of the City. There is no time limit and no other restrictions on the exercise of the appeal right. Land use decisions involve entitlements that property owners rely on and if there is no time limit and no other restrictions on any City Council person or the City Manager appealing those decisions at any time, that creates a cloud on those approvals and they become, in affect, not final until the rights that are available under those permits vest. Since this would only apply to decisions made by the Planning Commission, and since City Councilmembers receive Planning Commission agendas prior to meetings, if there were a project that concerns them, the Councilmember would have the same opportunity as anyone else to appear before the Planning Commission and appeal it if Regular City Council Meeting August 6, 2003 Page 11 of 15 they felt the decision ought to be considered by the City Council. Three requirements that normally apply to an appeal of a Planning Commission decision, 1) that the appeal be filed within 10 days, 2) that they appear at the Planning Commission hearing and state their objections or position for the record, and 3) when filing an appeal, it must be in writing and state the reasons for the appeal in your notice of appeal. The lO-day limit is to create some finality and to cut off challenges so that the person can have a final action on their permit. He discussed how this could affect the availability of financing and how lenders would be reluctant to loan on projects in the City if their borrowers couldn't rely on their land use approvals for a definite period of time after they were granted. He discussed other options available to Council. Councilmember Baldwin stated that he did not have a problem with a ten-day appeal period. One of the arguments against requiring #2 is it may cause a perception that there is intent to intimidate the Planning Commission if a Councilmember attended a Commission meeting and tried to make an articulate argument. In the last case before the Planning Commission, that is why he did not attend the meeting. Councilmember Andersen agreed with Councilmember Baldwin's statements. He understands the concern of those that want to develop and they need some finality. However, he did not want to give up the right as both a citizen and an elected official to appeal Planning Commission or any other commission's decision. He strongly objected to proposed requirement #2 concerning attending the Planning Commission meeting. M/S Baldwin/Smith amending UCC Section 1203 to include items #1 and #3 as note din the Staff Report. Discussion followed relative to views concerning the three requirements listed by the City Attorney relative to the appeal process. There was also discussion of vested property rights. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Andersen, Smith and Baldwin. NOES: Mayor Larson. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Rodin. 9. NEW BUSINESS 9c. Approval of Responses to the Grand Jury of Mendocino County Final Report 2002-2003 City Manager Horsley advised that, by letter of July 1, 2003, the 2002-2003 Final Report of the Mendocino County Grand Jury was transmitted to the City of Ukiah. The report requests responses in two areas, water utility and animal control. Staff has reviewed the report and prepared replies that were included with the agenda summary report to Council. M/S Smith/Larson approving responses to the Grand Jury of Mendocino County Final Report 2002-2003, carried by a unanimous voice vote of the City Council. Sm NEW BUSINESS Adoption of Resolution Endorsing the Budget Accountability Act- Regular City Council Meeting August 6, 2003 Page 12 of 15 Councilmember Andersen Councilmember Andersen advised that he requested the Council consider the proposed "Budget Accountability Act". There is currently a ballot initiative regarding the state budget process. The Act would modify the State budget process, allowing a 55% vote on the budget (currently it is 66.7%), imposing permanent loss of salary for the Governor and legislators for each day the budget is not adopted after the constitutional deadline, requiring a 5% reserve in positive revenue years, and creating greater public access for budget and tax information and legislative voting records. He discussed the groups that are supporting the Act. It is slated to be on ballot in March 2004, pending signature gathering. A brief discussion followed concerning the proposal. M/S Baldwin/Smith adopting Resolution 2004-05, Accountability Act, carried by the following roll call vote: Andersen, Smith Baldwin, and Mayor Larson. NOES: ABSENT: Councilmember Rodin. Endorsing the Budget AYES: Councilmembers None. ABSTAIN: None. 9. NEW BUSINESS 9e. Consideration and Approval of Increase in Hours For the Personnel Assistant Position and Associated Budget Amendment Personnel Officer Harris advised that the City's Personnel Department is currently staffed with one full-time Personnel Officer and one part-time Personnel Assistant and has reached a critical juncture due to numerous and increasing recruitments, legal documentation requirements, increased worker's compensation activity, recurring employee relations issues, and lack of available support staff. She discussed the responsibilities of the Department and recommended that Council approve increasing the existing 32-hour/week Personnel Assistant position to a 40-hour/week benefited position. This would require a $14,796 amendment to the Personnel Department budget for the remainder of FY 2003-2004. Discussion followed concerning the matter. M/S Smith/Baldwin authorizing an increase of Personnel Assistant position from 32- hour/week to 40-hour full-time and approval of budget amendment in the amount of $14,796. Councilmember Andersen stated that he understood the concern of the Personnel Officer but he is also concerned that this amount of money will need to come from something else in the budget to pay for the additional hours. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Andersen, Smith Baldwin, and Mayor Larson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: ABSENT: None. Rodin, None. 10. COUNCIL REPORTS Regular City Council Meeting August 6, 2003 Page 13 of 15 Councilmember Baldwin wanted to talk to Council about the Paths, Open Space, and Creeks Commission (POSC) with regard to direction to them concerning the Hillside Development Regulations. Mayor Larson reported that there is a need to agendize for the next meeting about a high school teacher and his students in Seattle, WA who have done some research on "The Legends of the Redwoods". When the Redwood Highway first opened in 1927 a marathon was run from San Francisco to Grants Pass, Oregon and included all Native American runners. The City of Ukiah is one of the 62-mile increments and allows the City to provide a promotional effort for "Native American Week" scheduled in September 2004. The City of Ukiah will have to commit to sponsorship and some funds would need to be allocated toward the City's participation in the event. Discussion continued with regard to the event and its cultural, economic, and other benefits associated with the event and the City of Ukiah. 12. CITY MANGER/CITY CLERK REPORTS City Manager Horsley discussed the recycling area at the transfer station that was over its maximum limit. She explained that the processing plant equipment was down in Sonoma County and they couldn't accept any more recycling until it was repaired. She reported that the soil samples for the Leslie Street contamination cleanup project have been collected and she will meet with them next week regarding the results. She also reported that Roland Sanford from the Mendocino County Water Agency met with a woman from the Army Corps of Engineers regarding the raising of the dam and she provided a copy of Mr. Sandford's memo to Council. She provided copies of three articles from the latest issue of the "Western Cities" magazine regarding "Local Fiscal Authority and Stability", "Civility in City Hall", and "Rosenberg's Rules of Orders". She received a copy of the Chamber of Commerce budget and will provide a copy to each Councilmember. Councilmember Andersen inquired if the City received a response to letter it sent to the Water Agency. City Manager Horsley advised that the County reviewed the letter and the Inland water and Power Agency discussed it at their meeting last night. The County will hold another meeting to discuss the response. Once the Board approves it, the document will be provided to all of the members. Adjourned to Closed Session at 11:19 p.m. Regular City Council Meeting August 6, 2003 Page 14 of 15 13. CLOSED SESSION a. Conference with Labor Negotiator, G.C. §54957.6 Employee Negotiations: Management Unit Labor Negotiator: Candace Horsley, City Manager No action taken. 14. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the City Council meeting was adjourned at 11:45 p.m. Marie Ulvila, City Clerk Regular City Council Meeting August 6, 2003 Page 15 of 15