Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05 MINUTES 07-18-94 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA JULY 5# 1994 NO. 5 7-18-94 CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION The meeting was called to order by Mayor Saltarelli at 7:06 p.m. at the Council Chambers, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, California. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilmember Thomas and the Invocation was given by Mayor Pro Tem Potts. ROLL CALL Council Present: Council Absent: City Clerk Wynn: Others Present: Thomas R. Saltarelli, Mayor Jim Potts, Mayor Pro Tem Mike Doyle Jeffery M. Thomas Tracy A. Worley None Absent William A. Huston, city Manager Lois Jeffrey, Interim City Attorney W. Douglas Franks, Chief of Police Robert Ledendecker, Director of Public Works Ronald A. Nault, Finance Director Susan Jones, Recreation Superintendent Valerie Whiteman, Chief Deputy City Clerk Bettie Correa, Sr. Personnel Analyst Doug Anderson, Transportation Engineer Rita Westfield, Asst. Dir., Comm. Development Dan Fox, Sr. Planner Dana Kasdan, Engineering Services Manager Gary Veeh, Water Services Manager Ed Elowe, Project Manager Irma Hernandez, Administrative Assistant Approximately 40 in the audience PUBLIC INPDT - None PDBLIC wR%RING ( IT~MR I THROUGH 3 ) VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14914 (NEWPORT CAMINO PLAZA, LTD.) Dan Fox, Sr. Planner, reported that the Planning Commission had approved a Design Review and Conditional Use Permit for an 18,000 square foot retail.center to be located at the northeast corner of Newport Avenue and E1 Camino Real. The Conditional Use Permit authorized the establishment of a drive-thrurestaurant, pet store and master sign plan for the shopping center. He stated the applicant proposed to subdivide the property to create two lots and summarized access to the site, reciprocal parking and access easements. Council/staff discussion followed regarding number of establishments in the City with operating hours until 2:00 a.m., security during early morning and school hours, possibility of youth loitering in the area during early morning hours, noise impacts, flexibility of individual store owners to determine hours of operation, and double drive-thru lanes at Rally's Hamburgers. Council Minutes Page 2, 7-5-94 Mayor Saltarelli opened the Public Hearing at 7:12 p.m. The following member of the audience addressed the City Council regarding hours of operation and double drive-thru lanes for Ratly's Hamburgers: Gregory Bennett, Donley Bennett Architects There were no other speakers on the subject and the Public Hearing was closed at 7:15 p.m. It was moved by Potts, seconded by Thomas, to certify the Negative Declaration as adequate for the project by adopting the following Resolution No. 94-75: RESOLUTION NO. 94-75 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE FINAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION AS ADEQUATE FOR VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14914 INCLUDING REQUIRED FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Motion carried 5-0. It was moved by Potts, seconded by Thomas, to approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14914 by adopting the following Resolution No. 94-76: RESOLUTION NO. 94-76 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14914 Motion carried 5-0. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 93-176 (BART DUESLER) Dan Fox, Sr. Planner, reported that the Planning Commission recol~mended approval of the proposed parcel map located on Green Valley Drive south of Mitchell Drive. The site was approximately 12,000 square feet and contained four dwelling units. The proposed parcel map would create two parcels, each containing two dwelling units, and no new construction was proposed. Mayor Saltarelli opeDed the Public Hearing at 7:16 p.m. There were no speakers on the subject and the Public Hearing was closed. It was moved by Potts, seconded by Thomam, to certify the Final Negative Declaration as adequate for the project by adopting the following Resolution No. 94-77: RESOLUTION NO. 94-77 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE FINAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION AS ADEQUATE FOR TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 93-176 INCLUDING REQUIRED FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Motion carried 5-0. Council Minutes Page 3, 7-5-94 It was moved by Potts. seconded by Thomas, to approve Tentative Parcel Map 93-176 by adopting the following Resolution No. 94-78: RESOLUTION NO. 94-78 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 93-176 Motion carried 5-0. APPEAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 93-038 (ALLSTAR LUBE & TUNE) Dan Fox, Sr. Planner, reported that the Planning Commission had approved a Conditional Use Permit and Design Review which authorized establishment of an auto service facility located at the southeast corner of Red Hill Avenue and E1 Camino Real. The property owner had filed an appeal on two Conditions: Condition 6.1, which required annexation to the Tustin Landscape and Lighting District; and Condition 6.4, a requirement to provide an irrevocable offer of dedication for the street right-of-way. Mr. Fox's summary included dedication requirements based on County Master Plan of Arterial Highways, City's General Plan Circulation Element, and Tustin City Code; widening of Red Hill Avenue and E1 Camino Real would bring streets into conformance with these Plans; City's policy to maintain a circulation system supported by right- of-way dedication at developer expense; submittal of original development plan which.reflected ultimate right-of-way; traffic impacts created by development on property; dedication of right- of-way and construction of public improvements would reduce impacts created by project to an acceptable level; and deviating from the Master Plan could jeopardize future Measure M funding. Mayor Pro Tem Potts questioned if'it was possible for the City and applicant to reach an agreement of mutual benefit. He stated his opposition to taking property without fair market value compensation, and suggested continuing the matter until the next Council meeting to allow further negotiations. Council/staff discussion followed regarding setting precedent for City, not developers, to acquire right-of-way which would be cost prohibitive; loss of Measure M funds if improvements were not provided; clarification of right-of-way dedication costs; acquisition of land costs; target dates for widening of Red Hill Avenue and E1 Camino Real; number of properties involved in the widening of E1 Cam&no and Red Hill; and possible lack of proof that property owner would directly benefit from street widening. Mayor Saltarelli opened the Public Hearing at 7:30 p.m. The following members of the audience spoke in favor of Appeal of Conditional Use Permit based on fair compensation to property owner for dedication of right-of-way: Steve Crooke, Edgar Pankey, A1 Swearingen, attorney representing property owner property owner applicant Council Minutes Page 4, 7-5-94 Mayor Saltarelli questioned the property owner if his preference was to be compensated for the land or have the City widen the street. The property owner responded that he would not seek to have the street widened. Mayor Saltarelli stated the important issue was that the City and the property owner have a viable intersection; after that came the issue of compensation, which could be precedent setting. He noted that the City was not charging the property owner for the improvements, the City would have future street maintenance costs and, with the street Widening, there would be increased traffic and additional liability exposure to the City. He stated he strongly supported property rights and compensation, but the City faced the problem of reaching a decision based on law that would impact the City's ability to provide transportation lanes, especially along commercial corridors. Council/speaker Crooke discussion followed regarding specific findings in which the property owner found fault; lack of proportion between impact of project and acquisition of property; property owner's original assumption regarding dedication; and generation of sales tax revenue. Lois Jeffrey, Interim City Attorney, stated the issues were whether the City was obligated to compensate Mr. Pankey, was his property being taken, was there proportion between the traffic impact of the project and the requested dedication, and were the two issues in synchronization. If the Council determined they were in synchronization, dedication could be required without compensation; however, if the Council believed there was not synchronization, the proper course of action would be deletion of Condition 6.4. She noted this was an individualized determination and would not set precedent. Mayor Saltarelli expressed concern that if the City paid for the dedication without being required to do so, it could be a gift of public funds. He suggested the findings be re-evaluated by staff, Planning Commission and the property owner in an attempt to reach a resolution; and all fees be waived for any subsequent action by the Planning Commission or city Council. Councilmember Worley stated she believed the issue would set precedent due to ex~sting city policy stating the city had the right to require dedication of right-of-way and construction of required public improvements on streets adjacent to construction projects at developer expense. She noted the nineteen other projects in the area that would require street improvement at considerable expense and she did not believe the traffic impact of the subject project was negligible. Councilme~tber Thomas noted a Supreme Court case where that city could not prove that a project would or was likely to offset traffic demands. He noted Mr. Crooke's admission that this project was likely to affect traffic demands, expressed concern with possible gift of public funds, and agreed that the city and Mr. Pankey should attempt a resolution. council Minutes Page 5, 7-5-94 Mayor Pro Tem Potts questioned if the property owner was willing to work on a resolution, expressed belief this expenditure would not be a gift of public funds, and noted that Mr. Pankey could file a lawsuit against the City costing far more than the $90,000 in question. Mayor Saltarelli clarified that Mr. Pankey had not threatened to file a lawsuit against the city. Council/speakers Pankey and Crooke discussion followed regarding Mr. Pankey's willingness to allow staff and legal advisors to re- evaluate the affect of the project upon the street widening and subsequent compensation for the dedication. William Huston, City Manager, noted it was unnecessary to refer the matter back to the Planning Commission and suggested continuing the Public Hearing to the next City Council meeting. Councilmember Doyle stressed the importance of communication between the property owner, staff, Planning Commission and City Council to reach a resolution. It was moved by Potts, seconded bv Worlev, to continue the Public Hearing to the July 18, 1994 City Council meeting. Motion carried 5-0. COHSEHT C.~T~iDAR ( ITEKS 4 THROUGH ~3 ) Item No. 8 was removed from the Consent Calendar by Mayor Pro Tem Potts. It was moved by Potts, seconded by Thomas, to approve the remainder of the Consent Calendar as recommended by staff. Motion carried 5-0. APPROVAL OF DEMANDS AND RATIFICATION OF PAYROLL Recommendation: Approve Demands in the amount of $2,060,837.78 and ratify Payroll in the amount of $315,882.33. 1994-95 COUNTY OF ORANGE ANIMAL CONTROL/SHELTER CONTRACT Recommendation: Approve the Agreement for Animal Control and Shelter Services by the County of Orange and authorize the Mayor to sign the Agreement for the 1994-95 fiscal year as recommended by the Finance Department. AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT FOR 17TH STREET AND BRENAN WAY (PROJECT NO. 600116) Recommendation: Award the contract for subject project to S.J. Burkhardt, Inc. of Mira Loma, California, in the amount of $124,377.00 as recommended by the Public Works Department/Water Division. SALE OF SURPLUS EQUIPMENT Recommendation: Receive equipment as recommended Services Division. and file notice of sale of surplus by the Public Works Department/Field Council Minutes Page 6, 7-5-94 9J 10. 11. 12. RESOLUTION NO. 94-80 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, CONCERNING THE STATUS OF THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT FOR THE CITY OF TUSTIN Recomm ndatio : Adopt Resolution No. 94-80 concerning the status of the City of Tustin's Circulation Element as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZATION TO TAKE ACTION TO MINIMIZE THE CITY'S LIABILITY EXPOSURE AT TWO SUPERFUND SITES Recommendation: Approve the Group Participation Agreement for the Mountaineer Refinery Site (that will enable the City of Tustin to take advantage of two potential settlement options for de minimis contributors), and to authorize settlement at the Ekotek Site in the amount of $2,000.00, in accordance with the proposed settlement agreement as recommended by the City Attorney. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTING ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE IRVINE BOULEVARD/NEWPORT AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENT PROJECT Recommendation: Approve selection of ASL Consulting Engineers, Irvine, to provide consulting engineering services relating to the Irvine Boulevard/Newport Avenue Intersection Enhancement Project in the amount of $264,029.00 and authorize execution of the Professional Services Agreement by the Mayor and City Clerk, subject to the City Attorney's approval as-to-form as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION AGENDA - JUNE 27, 1994 Ail actions of the Planning Commission become final unless appealed by the City Council or member of the public. Recommendation: Ratify the Planning Commission Action Agenda of June 27, 1994. 13. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JUNE 14, 1994 SPECIAL MEETING AND JUNE 20, 1994 REGULAR MEETING Recommendation: Approve the City Council Minutes of June 14 and June 20, 1994. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM NO. 8 - REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 94-26 - CLAIMANT, KIM MORGAN; DATE OF LOSS, 4/7/94; DATE FILED WITH CITY, 5/12/94 Mayor Pro Tem Potts requested the City Attorney submit alternative options for consideration of this c19im. It was moved by Potts, seconded by Doyle, to direct staff to return with alternative options to avoid legal action regarding subject claim. Motion carried 5-0. REG~LARBUSINESS ( ITEMB 14 T~ROUGH 24 ) 14. JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT - ORANGE COUNTY FIRE AUTHORITY William Huston, City Manager, recommended approval of the Joint Powers Authority because data and analysis indicated that sixteen cities wanted additional oversight on future Fire Department council Page 7, 15. Minutes 7-5-94 development. He summarized distribution of equitable cost and representation for fire protection services; lack of service flexibility available to cities; creation of the Authority would provide cities, including Tustin, with full representation and voting membership; and prohibitive costs for cities to establish their own fire protection services. He stated the Joint Powers Authority was Tustin's best opportunity to maintain high quality fire service at a reasonable cost. council/staff discussion followed regarding ability of sixteen cities to form agreement on services/cost; common incentive factor among cities to obtain quality, affordable fire service; benefit of flexible service; management structure of the Authority; elimination of County level of bureaucracy; success of the Orange County Risk Management Authority; County Fire Department's reaction to creation of the Authority; non-payment to elected officials for serving on the Authority; and three-year period to evaluate success of the Authority. It was moved by Thomas, seconded by Worlev, to adopt the following Resolution No. 94-83 approving a Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement to form the Orange County Fire Authority: REBOLUTION NO. 94-83 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT TO FORM THE ORANGE COUNTY FIRE AUTHORITY AND AGREE TO PARTICIPATE IN ACTIVITIES THAT SUPPORT AUTHORITY FORMATION Motion carried 5-0. SELECTION OF PLkNNING COMMISSIONERS /%ND PARKS AND RECI~EATION COMMISSIONERS Mayor Pro Tem Potts stated he felt that Commissioner Baker had served excessive time on the Planning Commission and he should resign to allow new membership. He also stated his firm opinion that Kathy Weil should no longer serve as a Planning Commissioner because she had supported and was involved in the election campaigns of two incumbent Councilmembers. He cautioned new members of the Planning commission to refrain from political activity because they served all five Councilmembers, and he wanted to remove Commissioner Weil. Mayor Pro Tem Potty' motion to remove A1 Baker from the Planning Commission did not receive a second. Council/staff discussion followed regarding possible Brown Act violation for taking action on an item not on the agenda; allowing Commissioners Baker and Weil to address the Council before action was taken; agendizing removal of existing Planning Commissioners at the July 18, 1994 City Council meeting; and 4/5th vote requirement to agendize the subject immediately. Mayor Pro Tem Potts withdrew his motion to remove A1 Baker from the Planning Commission and requested the removal of existing Planning Commissioners be agendized at the July 18, 1994 city Council meeting. Council Minutes Page 8, 7-5-94 The City Council cast their votes for the following Planning Commission candidates: Jane Anderson, Lou Bone, John Butler, Jeff Crouch, Loren Della Marna, Michael Friedland, William Guthrie, Randall Ikeda, Marge Kasalek, Nancy Kuwada, Nanette Lunn, Howard Mitzman, and William Stracker. The votes were cast as follows for three vacancies: Saltarelli: Butler, Kasalek, Mitzman Potts: Kasalek, Lunn, Mitzman Doyle: Bone, Lunn, Mitzman Thomas: Butler, Kasalek, Lunn Worley: Kasalek, Lunn, Mitzman Marge Kasalek (4 votes), Nanette Lunn (4 votes) and Howard Mitzman (4 votes) were.appointed to the Planning Commission. Mayor Saltarelli and Mayor Pro Tem Potts commended former Planning Commissioners Butler and Stracker for their service to the community. Mayor Pro Tem Potts and Councilmember Worley expressed regret upon receiving letter of resignation from Parks and Recreation Commissioner Joseph Dias and commended him for his service to the community. The City Council cast their votes Recreation Commission candidates: Michael Friedland, Karen Hillyard, Murray. for the following Parks and Donald Biery, Chris Cormack, Jeannie Jackson, and Elwyn The first ballots were cast as follows for four vacancies: Saltarelli: Potts: Doyle: Thomas: Worley: Cormack, Hillyard, Jackson, Murray Biery, Cormack, Hillyard, Jackson Biery, Hillyard, Jackson, Murray Cormack, Hillyard, Jackson, Murray Biery, Cormack, Hillyard, Jackson Karen Hillyard (5 votes), Jeannie Jackson (5 votes), and Chris Cormack (4 votes) were appointed to the Parks and Recreation Commission. The second ballots were cast as follows for the remaining vacancy: Saltarelli: Murray Potts: Biery Doyle: Biery Thomas: Murray Worley: Biery Don Biery (3 votes) was appointed to the Parks and Recreation Commission. ~ Mayor Pro Tem Potts said a current Parks and Recreation Commissioner had sta~ed they would resign dependent upon certain Council Minutes Page 9, 7-5-94 selections made this evening and, if this proved to be true, he wanted Elwyn Murray automatically appointed to the Parks and Recreation Commission. RECESS - At 9:00 p.m. the meeting was recessed and reconvened at 9:14 p.m. 16. ORDINANCE NO. ~131 - AMENDING THE CITY CODE TO DESIGNATE ROSALIE PLACE AND QUENT DRIVE FOR PARKING BY PERMIT ONLY It was moved by Potts, seconded by Worley, to have first reading by title only of Ordinance No. 1131. Motion carried 5-0. Following first reading by title only of Ordinance No. 1131 by the Chief Deputy City Clerk, it was moved by Doyle, seconded by Potts, to introduce the following Ordinance No. 1131: ORDINANCE NO. 2131 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TUSTIN CITY CODE SECTION 5331n TO DESIGNATE ROSALIE PLACEAND QUENT DRIVE FOR PARKING BY PERMIT ONLY Motion carried 5-0. ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE REGARDING PUBLIC NUDITY It was moved by Thomas, seconded bv Worley, to introduce the following Ordinance No. 1133: ORDINANCE NO. 1~3~ - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RELATING TO PUBLIC NUDITY Motion carried 5-0. 18. REVISIONS TO REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR ADVERTISING BUS SHELTERS It was moved by Potts, seconded by Worley, to authorize staff to advertise and circulate the Request for Proposals for Bus Shelters with Advertising in the City of Tustin. The following member of the audience spoke in opposition to the proposed Request for Proposals related to section on ownership of the shelters at termination of the contract: Bruce Seidel, Patrick Target Media Council/staff discussion followed regarding standard practice of cities retaining ownership of shelters following termination of contracts. The following member of the audience questioned if property owners would be notified and have an opportunity to object prior to placement of bus shelters and received an affirmative response from staff: Don Saltarelli Motion carried 5-0. Council Minutes Page 10, 7-5-94 (~IFT BAI~ ORDINANCE Councilmember Doyle stated his support of the Levine Act and requested Alex Carrassi speak on the subject. The following member of the audience spoke in favor of gift restrictions and summarized the Levine Act: Alex Carrassi, 17961 Arbolada, Tustin William Huston, City Manager, noted that the City's Conflict of Interest Code would require amendment to conform with the proposed gift ban ordinance. The following member of the audience spoke in favor of gift bans and suggested ordinance language modification to include "gift or honorarium": Shirley Grindle, 19051 Glen Arran, Orange Council/speaker discussion followed regarding specific types of gift violations; and conflict of interest reporting by those who give gifts as well as receive. Mayor Saltarelli stated he believed the city did not have gift receipt problems, hoped constituents believed that the current Council would not be influenced by receipt of gifts, and suggested community activists address Political Action Committees rather than local elected officials. Councilmember Worley stated the reason this issue was an important part of her campaign was because a councilmember gift ban was non- existent. A developer could give a councilmember $10,000, the councilmember could accept the gift, and vote on the developer's project. She stated the Orange County Board of Supervisor's gift ban ordinance was too limiting and bordered on absurd. She supported the Levine Act because of its reasonableness and because it satisfied her intent to restrict influence on councilmembers' votes. Councilmember Thomas voiced his agreement, stated restricting items such as lunches would hinder a basic part of conducting business, stated r~porting of gift receipts on Statements of Economic Interests were required and available to the public, and he supported the Levine Act. Lois Jeffrey, Interim city A~torney, stated she would submit a draft ordinance based on the Levine Act's $250.00 limit concept for City Council review and modification. It was moved by Worle¥, seconded by Thomas, to enact an ordinance based on the Levine Act. Motion carried 5-0. Council Minutes Page 11, 7-5-94 Z0. TER~ LIHITS OI~DINANCE Mayor Saltarelli proposed that the voters decide this issue rather than the Council forcing their particular will on the constituents; and he believed that the people should have the choice of determining if they wanted councilmembers to serve two full terms, three full terms, or have no term limits. It was moved by Saltarelli. seconded by Thomas, to place an ordinance limiting City Council terms to three full terms on the November ballot. Councilmember Thomas stated the voters should be allowed additional options to settle this matter. Mayor Pro Tem Potts stated he opposed this ordinance because Councilmembers Saltarelli and Thomas had not supported his previous efforts to obtain term limits, three terms or 12 years was excessive to serve on the Council, no other cities had three term limits, and the additional cost for adding this measure to the ballot. He stated he wanted the people to decide between two term limits or no term limits. Council/staff discussion followed regarding the estimated cost for adding this measure to the November ballot. Councilmember Doyle questioned where the limit would be drawn in giving multiple choices to the voters, and expressed displeasure that Councilmembers Saltarelli and Thomas had originally opposed term limits on the ballot and were now requesting additional choices. He stated the choice should only be two term limits or no term limits and he opposed placing three-term limits on the ballot. Councilmember Worley stated she was not opposed to giving the voters the additional choice, unless the cost factor was excessive; the main issue was letting the people decide. Further Council discussion followed regarding cost factor; excessiveness of 12 year service; allowing voters multiple options or dictating the will of the Council; input received from residents favoring three-term limits; assumptions that newly elected councilmembers were elected solely on their platform of term limits; part~al and full term definitions; lack of prior support from Councilmembers Saltarelli and Thomas to establish term limits; seniority hinderance to City on County committees; and illogic in providing to the voters unending term limit choices. Motion carried 3-2, Potts and Doyle opposed. Mayor Pro Tem Potts requested a full cost analysis in two weeks for adding this measure to the ballot. Council Minutes Page 12, 7-5-94 21. 22. INITIATIVE TO A~END THE ORANGE COUNTY GENERAL PLaN TO DEBIGNATE MARINE CORPS AIR STATION EL TORO FOR CIVIL AVIATION AND RELATED USES Councilmember Thomas stated he had been frequently asked the city's position on this issue and to this point, the City had remained neutral. He questioned whether the City Council should officially support or oppose the initiative prior to completion of the Reuse Task Force study. He stated personally he opposed the initiative process but felt the Council should refrain from declaring an official position on the airport at E1 Toro. Mayor Pro Tem Potts stated he would never oppose the citizens initiative rights, but said he was opposed to placing an airport at E1 Toro. He said it was poorly thought out and believed a transportation hub would offer far greater benefits to the area and create more jobs; and felt elected officials should state their opinions as to the detrimental effect the airport would have on the City. Mayor Saltarelli agreed, but because the City was a member of the Reuse Task Force, there was an obligation to proceed with an open mind and review the impacts. He cautioned, that personal opinions aside, the Council should not officially take a position at this early stage. Mayor Pro Tem Potts urged the Council that Tustin voters should be educated regarding proposed flight paths and other ramifications of placing an airport at E1 Toro. Councilmember Doyle commented that if the airport initiative was successful, Tustin Ranch would become another city like Inglewood due to flight paths and excessive noise. It was moved by Potts, seconded by Thomas, to receive and file subject report. Motion carried 5-0. BIDDING OF SOLID WASTE COLLECTION CONTRACT Rita Westfield, Assistant Director of Community Development, reported staff had ~urveyed other cities regarding solid waste collection contracts. She summarized additional problems and issues that were revealed during the survey regarding AB 939 compliance; insufficient staff to collect and verify data from non-exclusive contracts and multiple haulers; loss of control of customer se~-vice and equipment standards; and difficulty in simultaneously administering multiple agreements. She noted that several cities selected their haulers based solely on lowest bid through stringent Request for Proposal requirements. Mayor Pro Tem Potts said he was willing to compromise and set the required bidding time at seven years instead of five and would agree to a competitive bid/Request for Qualifications (RFQ)/ Request for Proposal (RFP) process. He wanted to remove politics, Council Minutes Page 13, 7-5-94 gifts, and trash hauler donations to council election campaigns from the process; and to let the voters decide, which would remove the possibility of future City Councils not putting the contract out to bid. He noted this was the City's largest contract and had never been put out to bid. Coun¢ilmember Thomas stated the city could save $15,000 in election costs by allowing a City Council adopted ordinance ordering the contract out to bid. He objected to insinuations that Councilmembers accepted money and were corrupt; stated trash contract corruption may occur in other cities but not in Tustin; wanted future City Councils to have the option of negotiating this contract; and believed it was unnecessary to request the voters to decide an issue that the City Council was elected to decide. Mayor Pro Tem Potts responded that he did not want future Councils to have the option of not abiding by the ordinance; noted past persuasions by Waste Management that changed Council vote on placing the contract out to bid; that similar tactics would occur again in 6 years and the contract would never go out to bid; stated he had knowledge of organized crime and trash contract connections; and noted veiled threats had occurred against Councilmembers and their families. Councilmember Thomas strongly objected to insinuations of implied threats; noted that out of 31 cities, Tustin's trash rate had a 21st lowest ranking; believed that the Council and staff, through extensive negotiations, had obtained an excellent contract which resulted in an 11.2% rebate to the residents. He requested Councilmembers refrain from attacking and threatening each other; cease insinuations of corruption between Councilmembers and the trash hauling industry; and stated his willingness to work cooperatively. Councilmember Worley wanted the contract placed out to bid in seven years, but believed it should be a Council decision. She summarized her reasons noting that what the previous Council had accomplished was in the best interest of the City; low trash rates; complexity of the issue; avoidance of necessity to hire additional staff to administer the solid waste collection program; and required Council decisions on AB 939 diversion goal issues. She wanted a quality contract, thought it was unnecessary to submit it to the woters because Councilmembers were elected to make those decisions, and did not believe all trash companies were corrupt. She said she did not arrive at this decision based on fear or veiled threats, but believed Councilmembers should make contractual decisions. Mayor Pro Tem Potts said that Councilmember Worley believed in the best of all people but had not witnessed the crime he had seen during his tenure on the Council; noted the city may have received a better contract with lower rates had it gone out to bid previously; said his seven year compromise was based on allowing the people an opportunity to vote; that it was possible in six years that neither he nor Councilmember Worley would be on the Council and who would insure that the contract went to bid; and he Council Minutes Page 14, 7-5-94 guaranteed that competitive bidding would result in lower trash rates and better recycling ideas. He requested Councilmember Worley support him in allowing a vote of the people, and if she was concerned about veiled threats he would support her and her family and would not allow veiled threats to occur. Mayor Saltarelli stated he did not want to limit the City's ability to negotiate an excellent agreement, and noted the trash contract was a very complicated issue that the voters would not be in position to fully understand. He wanted the City to obtain the best service for the best cost; noted health and safety factors; did not believe that going out to bid would automatically insure low cost and low cost would not result in the best service; and commented on undesirability of political action committees and trash hauler involvement in election campaigns. The following members of the audience spoke in favor of placing Ordinance No. 1130 on the November ballot requiring the City's solid waste collection contract be subject to competitive bids: Zipora Shifberg-Mencher, 16282 Main St., Madeline Arakelian, South Coast Refuse Berklee Maughan, Tustin Nancy Arakelian, South Coast Refuse Alex Carrassi, 17961 Arbolada, Tustin Dolores Otting, 5 Star Rubbish Tustin The following members of the audience spoke in opposition to placing Ordinance No. 1130 on the November ballot: Jerry Weil, 1702 Summerville, Tustin Michelle Blair, Great Western Reclamation Councilmember Doyle wanted the citizens to decide, and noted the electorate had voted for him based on his campaign platform of placing this contract out to bid. Councilmember Worley stated she was new to the Council, idealistic, and wanted to believe that future Councils would submit this contract to bid. However, after listening to the various speakers, she now believed the people should decide. She had struggled with this issue; definitely wanted the contract submitted to bid; an~ because it was evident that might not occur, the voters should decide and remove control from Councilmembers. She recommended placement on the ballot with an expiration date of seven years. Council/staff discussion followed regarding addition of Request for Qualifications language to the ordinance; and clarification of difference between Request for Qualifications and Request for Proposals. The following member of the audience spoke in favor of Request for Qualifications process: Zipora Shifberg-Mencher, 16282 Main St., Tustin Council Minutes Page 15, 7-5-94 23. The following member of the audience spoke in favor of a bid specification process: Madeline Arakelian, South Coast Refuse William Huston, city Manager, stated the key factor was well- defined, controllable and objective specifications. Me did not have a strong opinion either way regarding RFQ vs. RFP processes, stressed need for strong specifications, and stated one problem with the RFQ approach was it could become argumentative and subjective. Me suggested using a process similar to that used for public works projects. It was moved by Potts, seconded by Do¥1m, to approve the following Ordinance No.- 1130 as modified to reflect a contract expiration date of seven years: ORDINANCE NO. 1130 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, REQUIRING THAT CITY CONTRACTS FOR THE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL OF SOLID WASTE AND THE COLLECTION OF RECYCLABLE MATERIAL BE SUBJECT TO COMPETITIVE BID Councilmember Worley stated she had not reached a decision on this matter prior to the meeting and encouraged Councilmembers to attend meetings with an open mind. Motion carried 5-0. ROLLER HOCKEY UPDATE William Huston, City Manager, stated Council had directed staff to submit a report regarding feasibility and cost of building a roller hockey facility at the Sports Park. Mayor Pro Tem Potts stated it appeared that using the Sports Park would be cost prohibitive; but he was unwilling to let the issue cease. He noted suggestions for using tennis courts at Columbus Tustin Park; felt it was imperative the City have a roller hockey site; noted it would be a source of revenue; stated the roller hockey company was willing to expend funds; and he wanted to let them proceed. He said the City would not expend funds, there was no risk factor for the City, and he wanted to eliminate the liability factor related to youth playing hockey in the streets. Councilmember Thomas said the Sports Park plan should not be altered and wanted construction to remain on schedule. He suggested meeting with the school district to explore alternatives such as using tennis courts at Currie School and continue exploration of other commercial sites. Mayor Saltarelli noted that in addition to competitive roller hockey there was a need for casual rollerblading. He suggested reinstating the asphalt jogging track at the Sports Park for that use, and requested staff investigate the cost. council Minutes Page 16, 7-5-94 24. Councilmember Worley wanted to vote immediately on reinstating the track and suggested the Parks and Recreation Commission become involved in locating a site if the other suggestions were not viable. William Huston, City Manager, clarified issues that would need to be resolved including cost estimates for using Columbus Tustin site; possible conflict related to joint use agreement with the school district; and specific type of concession arrangement. He questioned if the Council was directing that the concession go out to bid or proceed with the In-Line Skate and Hockey proposal. Mayor Pro Tem Potts stated his direction to staff was permit In- Line Skate and Hockey to proceed at their own expense at the two Columbus Tustin tennis courts, monitor their success, and then bid out other locations. Council/staff discussion followed regarding school district involvement; submittal to Council in two weeks of a concession agreement and procedures for authorizing use of public land for a commercial facility; financial returns to the city; insurance; CEQA requirements; Columbus Tustin Master Plan conformance; parking capacities at Columbus Tustin; logistics related to softball usage; surveying other cities for similar agreements; opposition to delaying action on the item longer than two weeks; and consideration of implementing the Sports Park jogging track for rollerblading. Representatives from In-Line Skate and Hockey addressed the city Council regarding location of a roller hockey site in the City. Council/staff/speakers discussion followed regarding use of In- Line Skate contractors; cost analysis; liability protection for City; clarification that In-Line Skate would bear the cost; and In-Line Skate operation and construction proposal. Mayor Saltarelli stated the City would cooperate with In-Line Skate to reach a mutual agreement and to satisfy the obligations required by the City for building the project on public property. He clarified that In-Line Skate representatives would submit their project cost analysis in two weeks along with the staff report outlining guidelines for proceeding with the project. CITY ATTORNEY Mayor Pro Tem Potts commended former city Attorney James Rourke on his job performance, but opposed his retirement benefits. He wanted to award the City Attorney contract to another firm with lower rates, noted that litigation services would remain with the firm of Rourke, Woodruff and Spradlin, and requested the new firm perform on an interim basis until the City Attorney study was completed. Councilmember Worley stated she saw no reason to change law firms; expressed satisfaction with Lois Jeffrey's performance; believed it was in the best interest of the city to remain with Rourke, Council Minutes Page 17, 7-5-94 Woodrl/ff and Spradlin and go out to bid when the study comparing in-house attorneys vs. contractual attorneys was completed; and requested appointment of Lois Jeffrey as the Interim City Attorney. Council/staff discussion followed regarding submittal of the City Attorney study by the second meeting in September; structure of the study and preparation by staff vs. consultant; survey of similar population cities; previous submittal of report surveying comparable cities; and submittal of a Request for Qualifications to contractual and in-house attorneys. Mayor Saltarelli stated that you did not "go out to bid" for legal services; law firms should be selected on the basis of municipal specialty, interviews, review of credentials, and background and litigation history investigations. He cautioned that a law firm's hourly rate would have no bearing on what the long-term costs would be to provide legal services. Mayor Pro Tem Ports stated that was his primary reason for wanting an in-house attorney; that staff could check if services were overbilled. He said he had never seen or received itemized invoice statements from the City Attorney's office; and reiterated his support for obtaining an interim law firm until the study was completed. William Huston, City Manager, responded that the City Attorney's office submitted detailed monthly statements that were available to the City Council and public; and he would insure that the Council received those billings in the future. Council discussion followed regarding Councilme~bers who had asked for and received copies of City Attorney monthly billings; and comparison of other cities' legal costs due to varied levels of litigation. Council concurrea to direct staff to submit the City Attorney study containing comparisons of in-house vs. contractual attorney issues and disposition of outside litigation at the September 19, 1994 City Council meeting. Mayor Saltarelli clarified, in reference to lack of a written Rourke, Woodruff and Spradlin agreement, that attorneys conducting business with a corporate entity were not required to have a written retainer agreement; and that the law firm of Rourke, Woodruff and Spradlin was the City Attorney and they had designated Lois Jeffrey to serve in that capacity. PUBLIC INPUT CITY ATTORNEY Dolores Otting, 5 Star Rubbish, commented on in-house attorneys in the Cities of Newport Beach and Costa Mesa. Council Minutes Page 18, 7-5-94 THREE-TERM LIMIT MEASURE Jerry Weil, 1702 Summerville, Tustin, suggested three-term limit ordinance clarify partial term definition and suggested specific language related to the ballot measure. Cw RETIREMENT OF CITY ENGINEER ROBERT LEDBNDECKER The city Council noted this was the final City Council meeting for city Engineer Robert Ledendecker prior to his retirement after 21 years with the City and expressed appreciation for his excellent service to the community. OTHER BUSINESS MEW COUNCILMEMBERS Mayor Pro Tem Potts apologized to newly elected Councilmembers Worley and Doyle for the long working hours and encouraged them to persevere. Be COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP ON CITY COMMITTEES Mayor Pro Tem Potts requested agendizing at the July 18, 1994 meeting, subject of Councilmembers not serving on city committees. LOWER PETERS CANYON DEVELOPMENT Councilmember Worley expressed concern regarding Lower Peters Canyon proposed high density development and requested a joint meeting with the Irvine city Council to discuss the matter. DJ FOURTH OF JULY CELEBRATION Councilmember Worley expressed regret regarding City ban on fireworks and commended staff on successful fireworks show. Councilmember Doyle reported on his participation in the Tustin Meadows Fourth of July parade. Councilmember Thomas reported on his participation in the Tustin Meadows Fourth of July parade; and, in the spirit of Fourth of July, expressed his desire that the Council work together cooperatively. Mayor Saltarelli commended Police Sgt. Jim Peery for his coordination of the Tustin Meadows Fourth of July celebration and commended staff for aggressively obtaining excellent fireworks for City's show. CHANGING OF 1996 MUNICIPAL ELECTION DATE Councilmember Thomas requested agendizing at the July 18, 1994 meeting, changing of the City's 1996 Municipal Election date. Council Minutes Page 19, 7-5-94 COUNCIL GOAL BETTING WORKSHOP Councilmember Thomas requested a Council goal setting workshop be scheduled in conjunction with a budget workshop. UPDATING POPULATION BIGNS Councilmember Thomas requested City entry population signs be updated. JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT (~%RGO AIRCRAFT Councilmember Thomas noted public notice on cargo aircraft travel at John Wayne Airport. Staff responded they would provide additional information and backup data. CLOSED BEBSION Mayor Saltarelli announced that the City Council would convene to Closed Session to consider a matter of pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Session 54956.9(c) and a personnel matter pursuant to Government Code Section 54957. Mayor Saltarelli adjourned the meeting at 12:30 a.m. The next regular meetingof the City Council was scheduled for Monday, July 18, 1994, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at 300 Centennial Way. FOLLOWING CLOSED BEBBION At 12:45 p.m., the City Council came out of Closed Session and reconvened in open session. The City Council authorized the filing of litigation. The names of the parties and details would be provided upon inquiry upon the filing of the complaint. The meeting was adjourned at 12:45 p.m. THOMAS R. BALTARELLI, MAYOR MARY WYNN, CITY CLERK