HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin 11-17-03 MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2003
The Ukiah City Council met at an Adjourned Regular Meeting on November 17, 2003,
the notice for which had been legally noticed and posted, at 3:00 p.m. in the Civic
Center Council Chambers, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California. Roll was taken
and the following Councilmembers were present: Rodin, Andersen, Smith, Baldwin,
and Mayor Larson. Staff present: Police Captain Dewey, Finance Director Elton, City
Manager Horsley, Police Officer Johnson, Fire Chief Latipow, City Attorney Rapport,
Police Chief Williams, and Deputy City Clerk Ulvila.
1
I. Approval of Resolution Calling For Election For March 27 2004 On Two
Ballot Measures
I1. Consideration And Approval Of Ballot Measure To Adopt Transaction
And Use Tax Ordinance
II1. Consideration And Approval Of Ballot Arguments For Both Ballot
Measures
City Manager Horsley explained that an error was made in making the proper revisions
to the Staff Report and she provided Council with the final version that the City Attorney
had meant to be distributed to Council. She explained the revisions and noted that #4 is
$150,000 contribution per year for the Fire Department equipment replacement. This
was an estimate by the Fire Chief as to their needs, rather than the $75,000 estimate.
City Attorney Rapport advised that at the last City Council meeting he was directed to
develop alternate wording for the transaction and use tax ordinance that would
implement the Council's desire to have an increased level of service in the Police
Department. He worked in conjunction with Mayor Larson, Councilmember Andersen,
Police Chief Williams and Fire Chief Latipow.
A general discussion followed with regard to wording of the Ordinance. During
discussions, it was found that the following changes should be made:
The following sentence should be inserted before the last sentence in Alternative #4,
and after the words, "policing and traffic enforcement" so that the alternative would read:
"In no event shall the amount of general fund revenues budgeted in any future fiscal
year for public safety services in the City be less than an amount necessary to maintain
public safety services at the level available in the City in the 2003-2004 fiscal year with
additional services as specified herein, when those general fund revenues are
combined with the Proceeds; provided, however, that the requirement shall not prevent
the City from reorganizing or changing the method of providing public safety services.
The additional services beyond the base year level required by this section shall include
(1) the equivalent of four additional full-time peace officers as defined in Penal Code
Section 7 and Title 3, Part 2, Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) assigned to
patrol services, and (2) an annual contribution to the Fire Department Capital
Replacement account (Account No. 711) of not less than $75,000 to be used to replace
fully depreciated or obsolete equipment (including vehicles) or to purchase new
Adjourned Regular City Council Meeting
November 17, 2003
Page 1 of 8
equipment for the exclusive use of the Fire Department. "Patrol services" as used
herein means a uniformed assignment within the Police Department that provides
general or specific law enforcement duties, including, but not limited to, Community
Oriented Policing and Traffic Enforcement. The City shall not be obligated to provide
the level of public safety services mandated by this section in any fiscal year in which
the City Council determines on the basis of substantial evidence that such level of
public safety services will result in substantial and detrimental reductions of other basic
municipal services provided by the City of Ukiah."
There was discussion as to whether the first sentence of Alternative//4 should be the
first sentence in that paragraph and to say, in general, that the proceeds shall not be
used to supplement or supplant.
Mayor Larson took a poll of the Council and it was the consensus of the City Council
that the statement should be included in Alternate //4 and the amending sentence
should be placed at the beginning of the statement.
City Attorney Rapport confirmed that the sentence from Alternative//3 should precede
the very first words of Alternative//4.
Police Officer Randy Johnson, representing the Ukiah Police Department, discussed
the Police Department's concern with some wording in the Ordinance. One issue that is
very important to them concerns the final sentence that is contained in three of four
Alternatives. He also expressed concern for the wording of, "on the basis of substantial
evidence" and felt this wording is vague. Other wording of concern is, "will result in
substantial and detrimental reductions". He thought individuals could interpret these
words differently. It was his opinion that a percentage would be a more defined and a
better way to word the Ordinance. Although it is fairly clear as to what the City Council
is trying to do, the Ordinance does not have a sunset and would go on for many
Councils to come and there may be different interpretations. He acknowledged that the
Police Officers' Association, in general, is supportive of the Ordinance, and they too
would like to have more officers on the street to provide better service to the community.
There was discussion concerning whether the City would be able to utilize some of the
sales tax revenue for purposes other than public safety. City Attorney Rapport
explained that the added language of "supplement, not supplant" would not allow the
City to take the tax proceeds and use them in another department or for another
purpose. However, if the City were in the situation where it had to make a reduction in
other basic City services, it would not be obligated by this Ordinance to maintain the
same level of service in 2003/2004 that this Ordinance maintains.
3:37 p.m.: Councilmember Smith left the meeting.
Officer Johnson explained that he is concerned that the language is fairly ambiguous
and if a new Council wants to use the money in other ways, rather than exclusively for
public services, it could change things.
Adjourned Regular City Council Meeting
November 17, 2003
Page 2 of 8
City Attorney Rapport explained that the phrase, "substantial and detrimental", gives
the decision makers some discretion and latitude. It's not meaningless and it doesn't
allow a future City Council to make a decision based on its whim. There would have to
be substantial evidence and substantial reductions in other City departments and
reductions would have to be shown to have some meaningful detrimental impact on the
community. It would also have to be in "basic City services".
Councilmember Andersen suggested adding wording after "on the basis of substantial
evidence" with specific findings so that a Council can't vote to decide that they don't
have to fund that extra money to the Police Department.
Mayor Larson explained that wording could be added to that sentence which also
defines "substantial and detrimental reductions" as resulting in a threat to the public's
safety.
Officer Johnson suggested some findings should be added.
City Attorney Rapport suggested specific wording to modify the last sentence in the
last paragraph on the second page of Attachment 1of, "The City Council shall not be
obligated to provide the level of public safety services mandated by this section
in any fiscal year in which it makes specific written findings of fact. Those
findings of fact shall be based on substantial evidence before the Council that
such level of public safety services will result in substantial and detrimental
reduction of other basic municipal services provided by the City of Ukiah."
M/S Andersen/Rodin adopting the ordinance, amended with modifications as
discussed and using the fourth alternative presented by Staff with the inclusion of the
"proceeds" language from Alternative 3 and the additional language concerning
findings.
Councilmember Baldwin advised that he does not like the wording "shall not" and felt
that the sentence "Proceeds shall be used exclusively to supplement, not supplant, the
amount of General Fund revenues" could be followed with a proviso clause or an
"unless" clause. He felt that it contradicts exclusive use for public safety.
City Attorney Rapport disagreed with the meaning of the sentence. He understands
the sentence to read that the proceeds (tax revenues produced by the Ordinance)
cannot be used to supplant the General Fund revenues. The City can't use those tax
proceeds to displace the amount of General Fund revenues budgeted for public safety
in 2003/2004. It does not limit what the City can do with its General Fund revenues.
Police Chief Williams wanted to clarify the level of service and the budgeted service.
Since it will change from year to year, it is important for the public to understand that the
Council is supportive of maintaining the current level of services, and the public is voting
to provide additional resources to the City and departments.
City Attorney Rapport explained that in Alternative #4, the first sentence means that
the amount of General Fund revenues that the City will have to budget in future fiscal
Adjourned Regular City Council Meeting
November 17, 2003
Page 3 of 8
years will have to be an amount needed when combined with the proceeds from the tax
to maintain the 2003/2004 level of service that exists in the public safety departments,
plus the additional services that are required by this Ordinance. He explained that the
City couldn't use the proceeds from the tax for anything but public safety services. He
further explained that the intention isn't to free up General Fund revenues that the City
needs this year to meet the level of service.
City Manager Horsley discussed the situation with PERS and advised that the City will
be obligated to pay between $500,000 to $700,000 for public safety.
City Attorney Rapport explained that Alternative #3 is based on the premise that the
amount will be not less than the amount budgeted this year plus the proceeds. The
sentence regarding the proceeds not being used to supplant and only being used to
supplement makes sense in that paragraph. However, when it is inserted into the next
paragraph, where the premise of the paragraph is level of service, not amount of funds,
it doesn't make as much sense. After some discussion on the matter, the following
wording was suggested: "The City cannot reduce the amount of General Fund
revenues for the purpose of diverting the proceeds to another General Fund
purpose."
Councilmember Andersen suggested wording of, "Proceeds shall be used exclusively
to supplement and not supplant the level of service budgeted for public safety
services."
Officer Johnson was of the opinion that that anti-supplanting language should be
included in the Ordinance. Without it, there may be difficulty selling it to the public.
Finance Director Elton explained that Alternate #3 says a fixed level of the 2003/2004
budget, which would be $5 million and everything above that, could have to come out of
the tax proceeds. Alternative #4 means that the City would have to provide an
increasing amount of General Fund revenue because it talks about fixing the service
level.
City Attorney Rapport explained that Council has been discussing combining
Alternative #3 and #4 and he suggested that both the first and second sentence from
Alternative #3 be incorporated to show Council's intent. The Council wants a floor of
not less than the amount that was budgeted this year, plus the proceeds, and also
require not less than amount of money needed to maintain the level of service for this
year be included. Additionally, the sentence regarding the bail out would be added.
Alternative #4 is a commitment to a level of service; however, Council has been
discussing combining #3 and #4 so that there would be two floors, not less than the
current years' funding, plus the proceeds, and not less than an amount necessary to
maintain this level of service. Then the bail out sentence would be added. He
explained that Councilmember Baldwin's concern with contradictory wording may be
due to the words, "in no event" in both of those Alternatives. He suggested including
the first sentence in Alternative #3 and replacing "in no event" with "except as
otherwise provided herein". "In no event" should also be replaced in Alternative #4
of the same phrase.
Adjourned Regular City Council Meeting
November 17, 2003
Page 4 of 8
M/S Andersen/Larson amending the motion to change the language in the
"proceeds" sentence from "the amount of General Fund revenues" to the "level of
service budgeted" for public safety services in the 2003/2004 fiscal year.
Councilmember Baldwin recommended taking the first two sentences from Alternative
#3 and includes them in Alternative #4. He thought that would be the best way to obtain
a two-thirds majority vote to pass the measure.
M/S Andersen/Larson withdrawing the amendment to the motion.
M/S Andersen/Rodin withdrawing the original motion.
M/S Andersen/Baldwin to accept Alternative #4 with the inclusion of the first two
sentences of Alternative #3 and include the final two sentences as a replacement for the
final sentence of Alternative #4, and to replace the phrase "in no event" with "except as
provided herein". Also, after the word "city" on the second line, include the phrase
"shall not be less".
Police Chief Williams explained that it is important to understand that the City cannot
maintain the level of service with the budget of 2003/2004. He felt it is important to
either say that the City will maintain either the budget or services.
City Attorney Rapport clarified that the motion is guaranteeing that in no event will the
amount budgeted from the General Fund be less than the amount budgeted this year,
plus the proceeds. Council is also saying in no event shall the amount of General Fund
revenues be less than the amount necessary to maintain the current level of service,
including the additions. By saying both things, the City is guaranteeing that they'll never
use less than the amount of General Fund revenues they've committed this year, even if
the proceeds were enough by themselves to maintain the current level of service at that
higher level.
Fire Chief Latipow was of the opinion that it is important that the City Council have the
discretion to make the determination of what other public safety projects could be
funded if there are any additional revenues. If there is excess revenue, considering the
current level of service, the current budget, increases that are known will be occurring
in July 2004, the service level increases for the Police Department and a commitment
for capital equipment, then it would be at the discretion of the City Council to determine
what other public safety improvements they wish to fund. He supports allowing the
Council some discretion and believes that public safety items need consideration first
before looking at other areas.
Motion carried by the following roll
Andersen, Baldwin, and Mayor Larson.
Councilmember Smith.
call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Rodin,
NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT:
Adjourned Regular City Council Meeting
November 17, 2003
Page 5 of 8
It was the Consensus of the Council to direct Staff to forward a copy of the final
wording of the Ordinance to all of the City Councilmembers, Police Chief, and Fire Chief
before it is sent to the County.
Mayor Larson summarized that the minutes should reflect this Council's intention so
that these funds are used to increase public safety service in the community.
M/S Andersen/Baldwin adopting Resolution 2004-15, calling for a Special Municipal
Election, consolidating Special Municipal Election with Presidential Primary Election,
presenting ballot measures to make the position of City Clerk appointive rather than
elective, and adopting an Ordinance imposing a special one-half percent Sales Tax to
fund public safety services, transmitting measure to City Attorney for impartial analysis
and authorizing agreements and rebuttal arguments in favor of measures.
City Attorney Rapport noted that the lettering of the ballot measures should be left
blank in the Resolution, since the County will assign the lettering to the measures.
Motion carried with the amendment noted by City Attorney Rapport, by the following
roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Rodin, Andersen, Baldwin, and Mayor Larson.
NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Smith.
City Attorney Rapport explained that although the ballot arguments could be
submitted to the County at a later date, it was thought that since this meeting was
called, it might be the last time the Council meets before the ballot arguments need to
be submitted to the County.
It was the Consensus of Council that the argument in favor of the City Clerk's
measure is acceptable as proposed.
There was a general discussion concerning the language for the argument in support of
increased sales tax for public safety services. The number of additional police officers
on each shift was discussed.
Mayor Larson drew attention to the second sentence in the second paragraph of the
public safety argument, "Despite substantial expenditure, the City cannot afford
two police officers on each shift."
Councilmember Andersen recommended a statement be added that states the
importance of maintaining and improving the level of public safety in our City. He did
not like the wording of "cannot afford'.
Mayor Larson suggested that the language of, "The City must maintain and
increase police patrols and replace aging and obsolete equipment."
City Attorney Rapport explained that he was trying to convey to the voters that the
City can't meet a certain level of service now, and if the public votes for the tax
increase, the City will be able to guarantee that it will do that in the future.
Adjourned Regular City Council Meeting
November 17, 2003
Page 6 of 8
Councilmember Rodin suggested the following language of, "The City Council ur.qes a
yes vote to adopt a half-cent sales tax to be used exclusively to improve police and fire
services within the City. The City needs the revenue that will be .qenerated by this tax
for three reasons: 1) City crime increases. Downtown Ukiah businesses recently have
experienced a rash of break in's. We have all seen a rise in .qan.q activity. Many traffic
violations .qo unnoticed. At present, the City does not have the funds required to
address these problems. Revenue from this tax will provide an additional officer on
each shift, an addition that would substantially improve the present situation. 2)
Antiquated fire and ambulance equipment. Ukiah's Fire Department needs to replace
$1.5 million worth of equipment, additions that are fundamental to the safety of our
firefi.qhters and the public. At present, the City does not have the funds required to
replace the fundamental equipment needs. 3) State financial situation is uncertain. The
distinct possibility exists that the state's bud.qet deficit will siqnificantly reduce City
services, includin.q public safety. These tax revenues will provide a safety net for the
public safety needs of our community. Every penny of this tax will provide Police and
Fire protection in addition to what exists currently. The tax will be levied on purchases
within the City of Ukiah, most of which are made by nonresidents who will benefit from
the increased Police and Fire protection but pay no other City taxes. Because this is a
special tax, which must be used for public safety service, at least 66% must vote yes. If
you want adequate law enforcement and fire protection, we need you to vote yes and
encourage your friends and family to vote yes as well."
Police Captain Dewey suggested that the words, "by law" be inserted prior to "every
penny".
It was the consensus of the City Council to accept Councilmember Rodin's wording
for the argument in support of the sales tax measure.
It was the consensus of the City Council that all of the City Councilmembers would
sign the argument in support of the sales tax measure.
City Attorney Rapport explained that if an opposition were filed, the Council would
need to assign a person to write the rebuttal. The deadline is December 5, 2003. If
there is a need for a rebuttal argument, it could be agendized on the December 3, 2003
City Council meeting.
M/S Andersen/Baldwin approving ballot measure argument to adopt Transaction and
Use Tax Ordinance and that it be prepared for the signature of all five Councilmembers,
using Councilmember Rodin's recommended language.
Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Rodin,
Andersen, Baldwin, and Mayor Larson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT:
Councilmember Smith.
Mayor Larson stated that Councilmember Smith indicated that he would be happy to
sign the ballot argument.
1
ADJOURNMENT
Adjourned Regular City Council Meeting
November 17, 2003
Page 7 of 8
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:02 p.m.
Marie Ulvila, Deputy Gitg Glerk
Adjourned Regular City Council Meeting
November 17, 2003
Page 8 of 8