Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
CC 1 MINUTES 04-07-80
CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. INVOCATION IV. ROLL CALL PUBLIC HEARING MINUTES OF A REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Centennial Way March 10, 1980 7:30 P. M. The meeting was called to order by Mayor Schuster at 7:31 P.M. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Saltarelli. The Invocation was given by Councilman Welsh. Present: Councilpersons: Schuster, Saltarelli, Kennedy, Welsh, Sharp (arrived at 7:36 P.M.) Absent: Coun¢ilpersons: None Others Present: Dan Blankenship, City Administrator James G. Rourke, City Attorney Bob Ledendecker, City Engineer Mary E. Wynn, Chief Deputy City Clerk Hugh West, Maintenance Superintendent 1. PROPOSED PURCHASE OF TUSTIN WATER WORKS BY THE CITY OF TUSTIN The staff report was given by Dan Blankenship, City Administrator, indicating that this step is a result of over 10 years of negotiations with the Tustin Water Works. Until recently, the rates of the Tustin Water Works were such that purchase by the City was not in the public's best interest. Recent rate increases and other events have now made it possible for the City to consider the acquisition of the Tustin Water Works within the existing rate structure of the company with only the increases that would be required by the company itself for increased cost of water, energy and other costs subject to inflation. This is the first of two hearings that were advertised in the Tustin News and the City has mailed out a brochure to all of the customers of the Tustin Water Works. The acquisition proposed is to be ultimately accomplished by the formation of a non profit corporation which will sell bonds and pay for the Water Works as well as other funds for bond reserves, the expenses of issuing the bonds, and funds for some initial capital im- provements. In this negotiation, the City represents 40% of the Water Works, and the City Council has authorized to give equal rates and service tDCounty residents. The City's objective has been to preserve a reliable water supply and to attempt to maintain rates that are as low as are practical with the costs of operation and the capital improvement needs. He met with the Santiato Municipal Advisory Committee (SMAC) on March 5, 1980 and spoke for about an hour. The Public Hearing was opened at 7:39 P.M. Phil Andersen, 161 Fashion Lane, Suite 114, Tustin, furnished the Council with his letter dated March 10, 1980, a copy of which is on file in the City Clerk's office. He read the letter which contained questions about: 1) rate increases, 2) power of the Board of Directors, 3) reimbursement to the old stockholders for recapture of investment tax credit, depreci- ation expenses or other adjustments, 4) bonds, 5) deficiencies in the system, 6) budget for the Water Works, 7) rate adjustments for increased interest expense, replacement of existing system and increased operating costs, 8) salaries of Tustin Water Works employees, 9) increase in City expenses due to this acquisition, and 10) purpose for buying the Water Works. He asked for written answers to these questions prior to the March 17th Public Hearing. (The written response from staff is on file in the City Clerk's office dated March 12, 1980.) Bill Smart, 1741 Stonehenge Drive, Tustin, had the following questions: 1) What went into deciding the purchase price, 2) What does the word "base" price mean, and 3) does the bond debt service refer to the bonds you are intending to underwrite. Council Minutes Page 2, 3-10-80 Dan Blankenship responded as follows: 1) We have been in negotiations for many years and different approaches have been considered and the Council has held the position that if the City had to raise water rates to buy the system, the price was too high. The financial consultant made a brief analysis that if we were to condemn the system in the courts, the system is worth perhaps $14,000,000. On the other hand, if we were to capitalize the profits that the existing stockholders are making, we could project a much lower purchase price of $2,000,000. However, they are not earning on all of their system because of the main extension agreements. The PUC will not let them put that into their rate base and allow them to earn profit on it until they have paid off those agreements. ~ The price of $6,000,000 is primarily a matter of negotiations, trying to get the best price that we felt we could get, 2) The base price is the price as of June, 1979 which does not have an inflation factor for cost of living increase but does have a provision that if they make improvements to the system between that date and the time we acquire the system, those improvements would be added to the purchase price. They will have accounts receivable and accounts payable which we will try to be fair in the resolu- tion of those issues. The only thing other than the base price is the repurchase agreements of approximately $1,060,000, which the City will be assuming, and 3) The bond debt service of 25 years, 656,000 is the antici- pated bonds sold by the non profit corporation. Mr. Smart said that since 1972 he had been extremely pleased with the cost and the level of service in Tustin and he has never had any complaints about water pressure or problems in receiving the water. Bill Davenport, 13762 Loretta Drive, Santa Ana, a director of the East Orange County Water District and a resident of the County who is served by the Tustin Water Works, stated that he had done considerable back- ground work in this area and he pointed out that in 1971, the City of Tustin offered $2,700,000 for the Water Works, and the East Orange County Water District made an offer of $3,200,000, based on an appraised value of $2,500,000, and he would like to know what the appraised value is today. He also would like to know the PUC base. In 1971 it was about $2,500,000. He pointed out that in December, 1970, the City Council made the decision that the East Orange County Water District was the logical purchaser. He said rates would have to be adjusted because the franchise fee will have to be paid to the County and the City of Orange. He felt the City Council should give careful consideration to having 60% of the Board of the non-profit corporation to be residents outside the City of Tustin and the authority should be someone other than the City Council. Karsten Hirsch, 18502 Beachmont Ave., Santa Ana, expressed that the City should have a budget for the Water Works and he would like to know what other companies want to buy the Water Works. Ed Wells, consultant for the City since 1969, reported that the City has turned down the price many times. What we face is an opportunity to change the basic direction of this asset. At the end of 1979, their accu_n~ulated year to year original cost was $6,800,000. The estimates have been made that to reproduce new and sub,act depreciations on accrued basis would leave a value somewhere between $13,000,000 and $14,000,000. The City can continue to operate the system at about the same level of expense as the Water Company. The total salaries of employed personnel are very close to $200,000 a year while the total operating expenses are approximately $1,400,000, including many items over which neither the company nor the City will have any control. Salaries are about 1/7th of the total operating expenses. Other charges include the cost to pur- chase water from the East Orange County Water District or from any other delivery source, the cost of purchased power and the cost of extraction, which is charged for by the Orange County Water District. Under public utility operations, those costs of power, purchased water, and pump taxes are levied by outside agencies and are routinely passed along by the company to the customer in the form of increases of water rates which they initiate. The Company cannot initiate a water rate increase to re- imburse itself for its expenditures or to cover increased costs other than certain categories without going back to the PUC. The best approach to buying the system and raising capital for needed improvements is through the sale of bonds using the non-profit corporation. On the other hand, the bond market interests are very high at this time, so the document that we have is unique in that it permits the City to take over the system i~ediately, operate it at a basic interest rate of about 7¼% for 25 years. There is always the concern about the character and quality of the system. co~ncl~ ~nu=es Page 3, 3-10-80 The City may set a priority 'of improvement programs that will eliminate the deficiencies and improve fire protection. The City will operate the system equally, both for the residents inside and outside the City. Steven Johnson, secretary to SMAC and businessman in Tustin, had two questions of the Council: 1) Will there be the same rates for City and County residents, and why would the City want to sell portions not in the City's Sphere of Influence, and 2) Does the purchase represent an effort to annex the County areas? Dan Blankenship, City Administrator, answered that the City Council's policy is that there would not be discriminatory rates but on the other hand, if the portion outside the City was subject to franchise fees that would be a different situation. There would still not be discriminatory rates by the City. The resolution that will be adopted if the Council decides to approve the purchase of the Water Works says that no discrimi- nation should be made in the water rates of customers inside or outside the City of Tustin. Councilman Saltarelli suggested that we attempt to have the Board of Supervisors waive the franchise fees in any area outside the City of Tustin. The City Administrator explained that the area north of Fairhaven and west of Esplanade is a high elevation and the most difficult area to provide adequate water pressure and that area would be at the south end of the City of Orange service and would be easier for Orange to maintain adequate protection. Any portions that would be sold would not be in Tustin's Sphere of Influence. The Council assured Mr. Johnson that the City would not use the purchase of the Water Works as a tool for annexation. They did emphasize that a united community is a mutual benefit for all residents but there was no relationship between annexation and the purchase of the Water Works. Matt Nisson, 1462 Red Hill, asked the following questions: 1) When do you plan to take over the Water Works, 2) Who would pay off the present bond indebtedness, and 3) Is there a reserve to pay off these bonds. Dan Blankenship answered the questions as follows: 1) Probably not until July or August, 2) The Water Works Corporation would be accepting the liability for the bonds until such time as bonds were sold by the non-profit corporation and at that time, the bonds would be paid off, and 3) To the best of my knowledge, they do not have a reserve set up for these bonds but they will have to be paid off in accordance to the bond provisions, or when the non-profit corporation sells its bonds, then all the bonds will be paid off. Mr. Reed Jensen said there was no reserve. Dale Kimsey, 1821 Stonehenge, said he had not heard any reasons why the City should buy the water works. He felt that the Tustin Water Works has a good track record and the PUC has done a good job. He is a believer in free enterprize and feels they can get more done than bureaucracies. Lloyd Robbins, 2002 Fallen Leaf, was not opposed to the purchase of the Water Works but addressed his remarks to the maintenance and replacement of the system. He was concerned about the underground deteriorations and felt it will cost much more to maintain and replace than the City is anticipating. Bill Ritchey, member of the Board of the Foothills Community Association, commented that it appears Tustin is not buying the Water Works but de- pending upon the users to supply the money, 60% of whom reside in the County but who have no voice in the acquisition. He asked if the City would purchase just the part of the system that is in the City limits, how the City is going to treat new County development hook ups and what is the possibility of establishing a trustee board, with a representative of each community that is to be served in proportional representation. Richard B. Edgar, 13622 Loretta Drive, was wholeheartedly in favor of the purchase of the Water Works. In some areas, the delivery of the water system is inadequate for fire protection and he did not feel Tustin Water Works has been ignorant of this. The need that exists is that we care enough about the residents and we are going to do something about it. COUNCIL MINUTES Page 4~ 3-10-80 VI. NEW BUSINESS VII. ADJOURNMENT Lowell Eherhardt, City resident for 12 years, agreed with most of the concerns of the speakers except the last speaker. He was apprehensive because he did not think the public had heard the whole story. He wants to know what the master plan is, what are going to be the capital ex- penditures and what it is going to cost to operate. Councilman Sharp pointed out that the City Council has been very business- like in approaching this acquisition. They have retained several expert people with credentials and we intend to hire the employees of the Water Works to help with this. It was moved by Welsh, seconded by Sharp, to continue this Public Hearing to March 17, 1980 at 7:30 P.M. Carried 5-0. 1. REQUEST TO RECRUIT FOR PERSONNEL DIRECTOR It was moved by Welsh, seconded by Kennedy, to authorize recruitment of a Personnel Director and temporary appointment of Acting Personnel Director as requested by the City Administrator. Carried 5-0. 2. REQUEST FOR TEMPORARY ON-STREET PARKING, IRVINE INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX It was moved by Welsh, seconded by Kennedy, to grant permission for the on-street parking prohibition in the vicinity of Duke Timber Construction Company of 2841 Dow Avenue to be relaxed for a four week period during the construction of an addition to their existing building. Carried 5-0. It was moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Sharp, to adjourn at 10:15 P.M. to the next regular meeting on March 17, 1980. Carried. MAYOR CITY CLERK CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. RECESS MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Centennial Way March 17, 1980' Following the Planning Agency meeting, the City Council meeting was called to order by Mayor Pro Tem Saltarelli at 4:04 P.M. Present: Councilpersons: Saltarelli, Sharp, Kennedy, Welsh Absent: Councilpersons: Schuster Others Present: Dan Blankenship, City Administrator Mike Brotemarkle, Conununity Development Director James G. Rourke, City Attorney Mary E. Wynn, Chief Deputy City Clerk Bob Ledendecker, City Engineer Approximately 8 in the audience It was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Welsh, to recess to the Redevelopment Agency at 4:05 P.M. Carried. MINUTES OF A P~GULARMEETING REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY March 17, 1980 1. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Saltarelli at 4:05 P.M. 2. Present: Members: Saltarelli, Kennedy, Welsh Absent: Members: Sharp 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of March 3, 1980 meeting. It was moved by Welsh, seconded by Kennedy, that the minutes of the March 3, 1980 meeting be approved. Carried 3-0, Sharp absent. 4. It was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Welsh, to approve the Demands for the Redevelopment Agency in the amount of $257,243.15. Carried 3-0, Sharp absent. 5. It was moved by Welsh, seconded by Kennedy, to adjourn at 4:06 P.M. to the next regular meeting on April 7, 1980. Carried. CHAIRMAN PUBLIC CONCERNS II. CONSENT CALENDAR P~ECORDING SECRETARY MEETING OF TUSTIN CITY COUNIL RECONVENED AT 4:06 P.M. March 17, 1980 None 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - March 3, 1980. 2. APPROVAL OF DEMANDS in the amount of $683,578.32. RATIFICATION OF PAYROLL in the amount of $70,558.37. COUNCIL MINUTES Page 2, 3-17-80 III. ORDINANCES FOR INTRO- DUCTION RELEASE OF BONDS - PARCEL MAP NO. 78-120. Authorize the release of the Faithful Performance Bond, No. L-05-034112 in the amount of $202,100.00, the Labor and Materials Bond, No. L05-034112 in the amount of $101,050.00, and the Monu- mentation Bond, No. L05-034140 in the amount of $500.00 for Parcel Map No. 78-120 as recommended by the City Engineer. 4. RESOLUTION NO. 80-27 A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Tustin California, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR (PROJECT I) MAIN STREET SIDE- WALK CONSTRUCTION AND (PROJECT II) PROSPECT AVENUE SIDEWALK CON- STRUCTION AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS Adoption of Resolution No. 80-27 as recommended by the Engineering~ Department. 5. RESOLUTION NO. 80-28 A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, ESTABLISHING CERTAIN FEES AND SERVICE CHARGES Adoption of Resolution NO. 80-28 as recommended by the City Administrator. 6. RESOLUTION NO. 80-25 A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Tustin, FINDING AND DECLARING A NEGATIVE IMPACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF NEWPORT AVENUE ACROSS THE ATCHISON, TOPEKA AND SANTA FE RAILWAY AND THE ORANGE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT RIGHT-OF-WAY Adgption of Resolution No. 80-25 as recommended by the City Engineer. ITEM 6 Councilwoman Kennedy asked if we should not study this further since we have just approved a Zone Change to Residential Planned Development in that area. Bob Ledendecker, City Engineer, responded that staff feels it is a negative impact regardless of the zoning. Part of the application is for an at grade crossing. ITEM 5 Councilwoman Kennedy expressed concern over the wide range of increases, sometimes 50%, on some items, i.e., the address map from $6.75 to $15.00. Dan Blankenship, City Administrator, explained that previously the address map was one large sheet, but since the Peters Canyon Annexation, it now is made up of two large sheets of paper which increases the cost. He explained that the increases were to offset cost increases and not to raise revenue. ITEM 4 Councilman Welsh asked why this project was so long going out to bid since it was budgeted. Mr. Ledendecker, City Engineer, explained that this was a substitute pro- ject. When the School District denied the bike trail on San Juan, we had to get approval from the State to reallocate the money to this project. It was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Saltarelli, to approve the Consent Calendar as submitted. Carried 4-0, Schuster absent. 1. ORDINANCE NO. 824 An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, PROHIBITING PARKING AT CERTAIN HOURS IN THE PARKING LOTS ADJACENT TO CENTENNI~L PARK AND AUTHORIZING THE TOWING AWAY OF I?.LMGALLY PARKED VEHICLES IV. ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION Vo OLD BUSINESS COUNCIL MINUTES Page 3, 3~17-80 It was moved by Welsh, seconded by Saltarelli, that Ordinance No. 824 have first reading by title only. Carried 4-0, Schuster absent. Following the reading of the title of Ordinance No. 824 by Mary E. Wynn', Chief Deputy City Clerk, it was moved by Welsh, seconded by Kennedy, that Ordinance No. 824 be introduced, with the following change in Section I., line 7: "between the hours of 12:00 midnight and 6:00 A.M. daily." Carried 4-0, Schuster absent. This change was made because many times there, are functions at the club houses that last until midnight. The purpose of the ordinance is to relieve overnight parking. 1. ORDINANCE NO. 823 An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY FROM INDUSTRIAL (M-l) TO RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (P.D.) DISTRICT It was moved by Welsh, seconded by Saltarelli, that Ordinance No. 823 have second reading by title only. Carried 4-0, Schuster absent. Following the reading of the title of Ordinance No. 823 by Mary E. Wynn, Chief Deputy City Clerk, it was moved by Sharp, seconded by Welsh, that Ordinance No. 823 be passed and adopted. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Saltarelli, Sharp, Welsh NOES: Kennedy ABSENT: Schuster 1. BIK~ ~ND PEDESTRIAN PATH WITHIN THE ATCHISON, TOPEKA AND SANTA FE RAILROAD .~iGHT OF WAY The staff report was given by Bob Ledendecker, City Engineer, stating that we had received 75 responses to the questionaires that were mailed to the residents and 56 were opposed to the Bike and Pedestrian Path and 18 were for it. W. Howard Sibley, 20 Granada, Villa Valencia Mobile Estates, reported that he had 143 signatures in opposition to this Bike and Pedestrian Path. Due to the responses of the affected residents immediately adjacent to the proposed project being about 3 to 1 against the project, it was moved by Welsh, seconded by Sharp, that this project not be pursued and that no further work or funds be committed to the project, except for notifying the resident that initiated the project study that it has been cancelled. Carried 4-0, Schuster absent. 2. PLACING PICTURE OF "MISS TUSTIN" IN CITY HALL Councilwoman Kennedy expressed that Miss Tustin does not have to be a City of Tustin resident and also that others such as the sponsors of Woman of the Year and Man of the Year might expect the same privilege and this caused her to have reservations about approving this. Councilman Sharp stated that Miss Tustin represents the City at many functions during the year and he thought it would be appropriate to place her picture in City Hall. Councilman Welsh commented that if this action produces any adverse effects, staff should bring it back to the Council. It was moved by Sharp, seconded by Saltarelli, to authorize placement of a photograph of Miss Tustin near the Building Directory near the entrance inside City Hall. Carried 4-0, Schuster absent. VI. NEW BUSINESS COUNCIL MINUTES Page 4, 3-17-80 1. SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS FISCAL YEAR 1979-80 It was m~ved by Kennedy, seconded by Saltarelli, to adopt Resolution 80-26 which restates the approved City budget for the 1979-80 Fiscal Year. Carried 4-0, Schuster absent. Councilwoman Kennedy commented that the report was clear and she congratu- lated the Finance Director. 2. AWARD OF BID - F.Y. '79-'80 SIDEWALK REPAIR PROGRAM Bids were opened for this project on March 7, 1980 at 11:00 A.M.,. and were recieved as follows: Fleming Engineering Inc., Cerritos, CA ................. $29,142.97 N.D.L. Construction Corporation, Rancho Cucamonga, CA--$39,777.83 Markel Cement Contracting Inc., Costa Mesa, CA ......... $43,882.44 Damon Construction Co., South Gate, CA ................. $44,057.60 Dyno Construction Inc., Azusa, CA ...................... $46,244.11 B.J. Construction Co., Monterey Park, CA ............... $46,513.30 Madison Paving, Signal Hill, CA ........................ $49,702.40 M. Grbava¢ Construction Co., San Gabriel, CA ........... $49,773.34 Nobest Incorporated, Westminster, CA ................... $54,555.20 The low bid is 36% below the Engineer's estimate of $45,500.00. There is presently $45,000.00 budgeted for this project. As was pointed out in the Staff memo of February 5, 1980, requesting authorization to advertise for bids, there are many additional locations throughout the City where sidewalk repair is necessary. The project plans call for repair at 112 different locations. In light of the very favorable bid received, it will be possible to add repair work at an estimated 50 additional locations. This will cut down on potential liability. It was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Welsh, to award the contract for the F.Y. '79-'80 Sidewalk Repair Program to Fleming Engineering Inc., of Cerritos, CA, and in addition, to authorize staff to add additional work to the contract not to exceed the $45,000.00 budgeted. Carried 4-0, Schuster absent. 3. RESOLUTION NO. 80-24 A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Tustin TO PARTICIPATE IN A SPECIAL ELECTION CALLED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ORANGE COUNTY TO APPROVE RENTAL HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FOR ELDERLY, HANDICAPPED, LOW- OR MODERATE-INCO~ PERSONS In response to Councilman Welsh's questions, ~ke Brotemarkle, Community Development Director, stated that the funds will come from the County and there will be no City funds involved. It was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Welsh, to adopt Resolution No. 80-24, which authorizes our participation in the Article 34 Referendum election. Carried 4-0, Schuster absent. 4. LITTLE LEAGUE SIGN FOR COLUMBUS TUSTIN PARK This item was continued to the 7:30 P.M. meeting. 5. REQUEST FOR SIGN CODE EXCEPTION (Imperial Thrift and Loan) The staff report was given by Mike Brotemarkle, Community Development Director. Jack Britton, 1146 E. Rosewood, a representative from the Sign Company, stated that this was just a change of face for existing signs. Instead of one long sign, they will just use the two shorter signs. It was moved by Welsh, seconded by Kennedy, to approve the two subject signs for Imperial Thrift with the following conditions: 1) Authorization for displaying signs in the two existing sign cabinets is only approved while Imperial Thrift occupies two tenant spaces, and 2) If one of the tenant spaces is vacated by Imperial Thrift, the sign for that space must be relin- quished to the new tenant. Carried 4-0, Schuster absent. COUNCIL MINUTES Page 5, 3-17~80 VII. OTHER BUSINESS VIII. ADJOURNPIENT 6. POLICE PATROL VEHICLE REPLACEMENT It was moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Welsh, to approve the purchase of six (6) police patrol vehicles at the purchase price of $45,280.38. Carried 4-0, Schuster absent. RESOLUTION NO. 80-32 A Resolution of the City Council, City of Tustin, California, PROHIBITING CERTAIN VEHICLES FROM USING OLWYN DRIVE BETWEEN RED HILL AVENUE AND WOODLAWN AVENUE AND WOODLAWN AVENUE BETWEEN OLWYN DRIVE AND IRVINE BOULEVARD Bob Ledendecker, City Engineer, reported that this hand out item had been given to the Council as staff had received a complaint regarding the over- night parking of large commercial trucks on or near Olwyn Drive or the im- mediate vicinity. The vehicle is started in the early morning hours and left running for a period of time which results in an annoyance to the surrounding residents. It was also indicated that the truck parks off- street within a private driveway. It was moved b~ Welsh, seconded by Saltarelli, to adopt Resolution No. 80-32, which places a load limit of 6,000 pounds on wehicles using Olwyn Drive between Red Hill Avenue and Woodlawn Avenue and Woodlawn Avenue between Olwyn Drive and Irvine Boulevard. Carried 4-0, Schuster absent. AWARD OF A PORTION OF COUNTY TITLE III FUNDS FOR SERVICES TO SENIOR CITIZENS Dan Blankenship, City Administrator, reported that the Council had received a memo from the Parks and Recreation Director that the City of Tustin has been granted $7,656.80 for the purchase of equipment and furniture to be used in the City's Senior Citizen Programs. This grant is to be matched by $2,277.20 of City funds. REPLACE DOO_RS, INSTALL VIEW WINDOWS, AND REPLACE GLAZING The City Administrator addressed the Council regarding a memo they had received to replace doors, install view windows and replace glazing at City Hall. These doors represent a safety improvement. Staff advertised for bids on this project in September and November to 25 firms and no bids were received. Repeated telephoning to this one estimator resulted in his submitting a bid. New construction work has Orange County construction suppliers and contractors overwhelmed with work. It was moved by Welsh, seconded by Saltaretli, to approve the bid of Sonshine Glass and Mirror, Inc., 1743 W. Katel!a Ave., Orange, CA 92667 in the amount of $3200.00 for the installation of view windows, installa- tion of store front doors and replacement of side light glazing in City Hall and the Police Building. Carried 4-0, Schuster absent. CROSSWALK AT YORBA STREET AND AMAGANSENT WAY Councilman Welsh said that he had correspondence from Mrs. Hahn regarding children crossing Yorba Street at Amagansent Wa,=,. He asked the City Engineer if this was being taken care of. Bob Ledendecker, City Engineer, responded that he had informed Mrs. Hahn that hopefully the crosswalk would be in this week. It was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Welsh, to adjourn at 4:45 P.M. to the 7:30 P.M. meeting. Carried. MAYOR CITY CLERK COUNCIL MINUTES Page 6, 3-17-80 CALL TO ORDER II. RDLL CALL III. NEW BUS II,~ESS IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL March 17, 1980 7:30 P.M. Following the Planning Agency meeting, the City Council meeting was called to order at 7:38 P.M. by Mayor Schuster. Present: Councilpersons: Schuster, Saltarelli, Sharp, Kennedy, Welsh Absent: Councilpersons: None Others Present: Dan Blankenship, City Administrator James G. Rourke, City Attorney Mike Brotemarkle, Community Development Director Mary E. Wynn, Chief Deputy City Clerk Ed Bushong, Finance Director Charles Thayer, Police Chief Bob Ledendecker, City Engineer Don Biery, Park~ and Recreation Director R. Kenneth Fleagle, Consultant Approximately 75 in the audience 4. LITTLE LEAGUE SIGN FOR COLUMBUS TUSTIN PARK Mike Brotemarkle, Community DeveloPment Director, reported that this was a proposal by the Tustin Western Little League to place a 96 sq. ft., 11 ft. high, free standing si~n for both their identification and enlisting of sponsors. After consideration, staff felt there would be some concern with regard to future requests for similar signs by other utilizers of the field. 96 sq. ft. is the largest sign we permit under the sign code at the presen~ time. William _Ra~' Russell, 17922 Theodora, Tustin, representative from the Tustin Western Little League, agreed they would be willing to work with staff as to height, location of sign, possibility of sharing the sign with football and soccar leagues and insurance for the sign. It was moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Welsh, to approve the concept of a sign for Tustin Western Little League subject to the Tustin Western Little League meeting with staff and working out the details and staff bringing back the conditions for Council to vote on for the next meeting. Carried 5-0. 1. SALE OF SURPLUS PROPERTY ON NEWPORT AVENUE Bob Ledendecker, City Engineer, gave the staff report for the sale of two parcels on the westerly side of Newport Avenue between Irvine and Holt. These properties were acquired when we widened Newport Avenue several years ago and has since become surplus property for which the City no longer has a need. Sealed bids were received on March 6, 1980 at 3:00 P.M. for each parcel as follows: Northerly parcel - Raymond J. Larson - $21,800.00 (Minimum bid was designated to be $21,800.00) Southerly parcel - John M. Bell Raymond J. Larson $18,100.00 $17,700.00 The bid submitted on the southerly parcel by John M. Bell was subject to the parcel being granted vehicular access to Newport Avenue. Any access across the off-street bike path would create additional potential bicycle/ vehicle conflicts. The original intent of the off-street bicycle path was to isolate the bicyclists from vehicular traffic for safety reasons. COUNCIL MINUTES Page 7, 3-17-80 The Public Hearing was opened at 7:50 P.M. There being no comments or objections, it was moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Sharp, to close the Public Hearing and to authorize the following: 1. Denial of any vehicular access rights to the subject parcels. 2. Award of bid to Raymond J. Larson in the purchase of the most northerly parcel of Newport Avenue. 3. Award of bid to Raymond J. Larson in the amount of $17,700.00 for the purchase of the most southerly parcel of surplus land adjacent to Newport Avenue based upon the denial of access rights to Newport Avenue and the condition of bid proposal of John M. Bell. Newport Avenue from either of amount of $21,800.00 for the surplus land adjacent to Motion carried 5-0. 2. PURCHASE OF TUSTIN WATER WORKS SYSTEM BY THE CITY OF TUSTIN Dan Blankenship, City Administrator, reported that since the last Public Hearing on March 10th, the City Council has received a letter from the County Homeowners' Association opposing the proposed acquisition on the basis of past concerns about the City's development policies and past disagreements. The Santiago Municipal Advisory Council (SMAC) has sub- mitted a letter which approves the acquisition with 5 provisos, 3 of which were basically routine such as equality of rates, service and improven~nts and assurance that any improvements planned by the Water Works would be pursued in their area. They asked the Council to request the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to hold a Public Hearing in lieu of the PUC action without a Public Hearing on the proposed purchase. They also re- quested a 5 person board be elected by residents of the area and that the board be the authority to establish rates and setting policies. Letters were also received from John Roach encouraging acquisition because of the assurance the City would best serve the community in the upgrading of the system and provide the improvements needed such as pressure and water quality, and from Dave E. King, Wheeler Place, supporting the acquisition. The Public Hearing was opened at 7:55 P.M. Patricia Wedeil Sutcliff, 330 California, a former Councilperson, was in favor of the City purchasing the Water Works as she would be assured that the City ~©u!d restore and maintain the system. Her only concern was that the City not pay more than it is worth. Steven Johnson, secretary of S5~C, 17772 E. 17th Street (business address), stated that for the last month they had been holding meetings regarding the proposed acquisition of the Water Works and what it means to their area, and in keeping with the idea that SMAC wants to work with the City of Tustin and believes there is a common area to be attended to by both agencies, they have approved the Resolution. However, they have set out certain reservations that canno5 be eliminated without eliminating their approval. These reser- vations were in the letter received by the Council and also summarized by Dan Blankenship and recorded in the beginning of the minutes of this hearing. W. G. Colbern, President of the Chamber of Commerce, said that their Board of Directors has received reports from their Community Development Committee and their Political Action and Overview Committee. The Community Development Committee recommended favorably toward the purchase because of the continuing commercial and industrial development of the City which needs expanded use of water and for adequate water in case of fire. They felt no responsible juris- diction has as much interest as the City of Tustin. The excellent bond rating of the City of Tustin will enable lowest cost of supporting the required bonds to finance the action. The rate review and review of proposed capital im- provements are all subject to Public Hearings. This committee recommends the Water Works be purchased as soon as possible. Based upon 10 principles that were contained in a letter to the Council, the Political Action and Overview Committee expressed that the purchase could be of benefit to City of Tustin businessmen in the greater Tustin area. The Board of Directors and Executive Committee have not taken their position yet but they are vitally interested in the material available and would be inclined to take a positive action if the price is verified as not being excessive and the cost estimated would include any replacement or maintenance to bring it up to the standard. COUNCIL MINUTES Page 8, 3-17-80 Lloyd W. Robbins, 2002 Fallen Leaf Pl., Tustin, stated that he was not against the purchase of the Water Works. He brought up three problems that he thought ought to be resolved: 1) The decision making body should be the Board of Directors and not the City Council; 2) The bond market has taken a beating and probably won't be in much better shape a year from now and probably the discount that will have to be allowed could take an- other million dollars; and 3) A real good budget, perhaps budgetin? ahead for 2 or 3 years should be prepared using staff and the Water Works personnel to help determine the condition of the underground system. Jerry Weil, 1702 Sununerville, Tustin, was concerned about the decision making process. He expressed that he felt the time requirement for day to day problems of the Water Works would be too much for the Council members. The Board of Directors should perform this job. He did not agree that SMAC should have the majority control but they should have a representative on the Board. Phil Andersen, 161 Fashion Lane, Suite 114, thanked the staff for their quick response to his letter presented at the March 10th Public Hearing. He passed out another letter to the City Council which is on file in the City Clerk's office. He said he was not against the purchase of the Water Works but his letter contained four main problems: 1) Budgets - Operating as well as Capital Expenditure, 2) Bonds, 3) Rate Setting Policy, and 4) Price. He quoted from the minutes of the East Orange County Water District meeting of December 6, 1979 where Rich Saas spoke and explained he had worked for Toups Corp. and had done an appraisal of the Water Works which showed that it was very old and there would be high maintenance costs to restore. He also referred to the minutes of Dec. 13th where Dan · Blankenship said that no major improvements will be made in the first 10 years. Peer Swan, 14351 Morning Glory, recommended that this matter be continued and staff do more study and work with the Homeowners' Associations. He expressed that he did not feel the City was the only agency to purchase the Water Works. In answer to Councilman Saltarelli's question of why he pays more for Irvine Ranch Water District water, ~Lr. Swan answered that it was because they had good facilities and there was built in money for fixing up the system. Morey Iverson, 13452 Cindy Lane, hoped that politics did not come into the City's decision, but he would be proud to be a part of a City that owns the water Works. His background is of over 30 years in the Water Works, calling on cities, private water companies and irrigation districts. He wanted to clarify the following: 1) To his knowledge, there are no 8" openings for fire hydrants. The only reason for bringing in 8" pipe would be to help supply a new subdivision; 2) The only steel pipe used in Tustin Meadows is by private property owners to make their own service. The people com- plaining about low pressure may find steel pipe that has corroded but the pipe was installed by the o%vner; and 3) Tustin Water Works is one of the finest companies he has been associated with. In every system there are some old pipes but Tustin Water Works has bought quality material. There may be some problems, but this is true in every city. Niles P. Koines, 18022 Weston Place, Tustin, representative from the County Homeowners' Association, asked that the matter be continued for 45 days as was requested in their letter of March 13th. He said there was a procedure in the Public Utilities Code of the State of California which permits the formation of a Utilities District by the majority vote of the people. He cited Section 1005 which he said seemed to require that a Municipal Corp. first make provision for City residents and thereafter to the County resi- dents. After looking at the section of the code which Mr. Koines provided, Dan Blankenship said this section specifically says that whenever there is an excess of water, over and above what is necessary for the use of the muni- cipality and those it serves, the municipality may sell, lease, or dis- tribute the excess outside its corporate limits. Phil Andersen asked if the City excercised its option to take the areas of Peppertree and Laurelwood into the Tustin Water Works, would those residents still have to pay the Irvine Ranch Water District assessment. Dan Blankenship responded that Tustin Meadows is under the Tustin Water Works but pays to the Irvine Ranch Water District. An area is responsible even if they are in another district. He explained that in order for the City to exercise its option, there would have to be a Public Hearing and he did not think it would be likely that the staff would recommend approval COUNCIL MINUTES Page 9, 3-17-80 if the rates would have to be increased to more than they are paying at the time. Mr. Edwin Wells, consultant and principal author of the financial concept ~ of the possible acquisition of the Water Works, said he has been associated with this project for 11 years. The purchase price has been rejected several times becuase the rates could not support it. He believes the City has an agreement which can be amortized within the present rates. IS the City acquires the system,~ it can use the revenue that has been previously used for profits, income tax, and property tax to improve the system. The City can within its perogatives, require future subdividers to contribute in tract facilities rather than to require repayment over a long period of time. The City has three years to sell the bonds. They cannot use water revenue for any purpose other than water purposes. Any proceedings to halt the proposed purchase to study further and figure on a budget would not be' productive. Salaries are only 1/6th the total. We based our findings on PUC operating projections. The final analysis is we are losing money every month we put this off. Thomas Skip, County resident, asked that a motion be made to continue this hearing so that questions brought up could be answered. It was moved by Kennedy to continue this hearing to March 31st so that Council can study the new information. Because there was no second to the motion, it was moved by Kennedy to continue this hearing to March 24th. No second to this motion. In answer to a question of why the Board of Directors has to be advisory, Fritz Stradling, Bond Counsel in regards to this matter, explained that there has been a misunderstanding of the function of this particular non- profit corporation. It is primarily for the financing of the bonds. The corporation is set up on behalf of the City and its sole function is to issue the bonds and to lease the system to the City and once the City has complete control over the system under the lease, they will have full obli- gation for maintenance and operation. The idea is that these lease revenue payments will be securing the bonds. The bonds are subject to a trust and the trustee requires that the City will be the one that will provide rates and char~es sufficient to maintain the revenues to support the bonds. He believed, ~ithout further research on this, that the City having the public facility, has the legal obligation to provide rates and charges or provide the guidelines for rates and charges. Perhaps another non-profit corporation could be set up as an advisory committee to the City and would probably be very permi~sable. It was moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Sharp, to adopt Resolution No. 80-30, which certifies that the acquisition of the Tustin Water Works by the City of Tustin will not have a significant effect on the environment. The motion was withdrawn because the Public Hearing had not been closed. It was moved by Sharp, seconded by Saltarelli, to close the Public Hearing at 10:11 P.~. Carried 3-2, Welsh and Kennedy opposed. It was moved by Welsh, seconded by Kennedy, that instead of closing the Public Hearing that we continue the item to the next regular meeting in order to address the items brought before us and to reduce the price by $1,000,00©. The motion was defeated 2-3, Schuster, Saltarelli, and Sharp opposed. It was moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Sharp, to adopt Resolution No. 80-30 which certifies that the acquisition of the Tustin Water Works by the City of Tustin will not have a significant effect on the environment. Carried 5-0. Attorney Rourke pointed out that Resolution No. 80-31 refers to the form of agreement which authorizes the acquisition and contains the other items pro- vided relative to assurances to County residents about non discrimination and the form of agreement staff negotiated which was signed by the Tustin Water Works. In that agreement, there are 2 erroneous exhibits, each let- tered as Exhibit I, that are attached, and were attached in error, we believe, by the Water Works, and therefore as staff, we recommend to the Council that the resolution as submitted be modified as follows, starting at the end of Page 2 of each Exhibit I: Vo PUBLIC CONCERNS COUNCIL MINUTES Page 10, 3-17-80 Subject to the following modification and conditions: 1. Revision of Exhibit I, employment contracts of RoweD_horst and Jensen, to provide: (A) Employment until at least such time as the Tustin Water Works shareholders have been paid in full. (B) Salaries of $2,815.00 per month with raises of not less than fifty percent (50%) of those given to other City employees in comparable positions. (C) Regular City fringe benefits. (D) Availability of a pool vehicle for use of Reed Jensen for City business. (E) Assignment of a vehicle to Earl Rowenhorst for use on City business. (F) Use of house on the Tustin Water Works property and utilities for Earl Rowenhorst, and Tustin Water Works to give its written approval of this modification and delivery of a duly executed copy thereof to the City of Tustin before 5:00 o'clock P.M. on Wednesday, March 19, 1980. Other than that, we would recommend the Resolution with that addition to it. It was moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Sharp, to adopt Resolution No. 80-31 with the modifications to Exhibit I, as specified above by the City Attorney. Councilpersons Welsh and Kennedy desired that the concerns and questions brought up at the Public Hearing regarding price, budget, underground condition of the Water Works, etc. be studied and answered before voting on the matter. Councilman Saltarelli asked if there would be some stipulation for Mr. Earl Rowenhurst to give up his position as member of the Board of Directors of the East Orange County Water District. The City A~inistrator responded that if the City Council thinks there is a conflict of interest, it could be stipulated. Councilman Saltarelli said an opinion on this should be rendered if this motion passes. Motion passed 3-2, Kennedy and Welsh opposed. It was moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Welsh, to appoint Walter Fredriksen (County), William A Moses, II (County), Martin J. Regan (City), Lloyd W. Robbins (City) and Jerry Weil (City) to the Board of Directors of the non- profit Tustin Water Corporation. Carried 5-0. MISS TUSTIN PAGEANT Dave Edgar, representing the Tustin JCs, reported that they had just finished the most successful Miss Tustin Pageant, both financially and participation wise, and a good bit of the success is attributed to Mr. Blankenship's staff and for that reason he presented a plaque to the Parks and Recreation Department and to the Maintenance Department and he thanked the Mayor for his participation in all aspects of the pageant. Mayor Schuster said that the Tustin JCs did a beautiful job with the pageant. BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN PATH WITHIN THE ATCHISON, TOPEKA AND SANTA FE RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY Jack Ohringer, 14811 Alder Lane, said he had just been informed that the Council had decided to not pursue this project. Since the City is not going to pursue this, is it possible for the homeowners to purchase the land. Bob Ledendecker, City Engineer, informed Mr. Ohringer that the right of way still belongs to the railroad and would have to be formally abandoned. VI. OTHER BUSINESS COUNCIL MINUTES Page 11, 3-17-80 Mr. Ohringer asked how the homeowners could go about getting it abandoned. Mr. Ledendecker asked him to give him his name and address and he would get back to him with the information. SIGNAL DEVICES ALONG THE RAILROAD George Spiker, 14711 Alder, remarked about the modification of the c~0ssing from Tustin Meadows into Peppertree at Sycamore and asked if there was any way that the City and the homeowners could combine to make a recommendation to the railroad to modify the 2 big tall silver poles that are used for signal devices so that they would be more aesthetic. The City Engineer said that any modification would have to come through the railroad to the Public Utilities Commission. POLITICAL SIGNS Richard B. Edgar, 13622 Loretta Drive, wanted to note that as a political candidate, he had put political signs on a number of private residences, with their permission, and there have been a number of them taken down by vandals and he felt this was unfortunate that some members of our community would be doing this. LARGE TRUCKS PARKED OVERNIGHT Peer Swan, 14351 Morning Glory, complained about large trucks parking all over the City and particularly on Redhill between the Santa Fe Railway main tracks and Sycamore Avenue. It was moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Kennedy, that staff be directed to look into the problem of parking in general along Tustin Meadows wall on Redhitl between the Santa Fe Railroad main tracks and Walnut Avenue and any other areas where trucks park and if staff believes something should be done, they be authorized to take whatever steps are necessary to elimi- nate the hazard. Carried 5-0. COUNTY CO~v?LETiON OF SIDEWALK AND STREET ON NORTH SIDE OF BRYAN AVENUE Councilman Sharp asked that a letter be sent to Supervisor Riley thanking the County for their completion of the sidewalk and street on the north side of Bryan Avenue. Councilman Welsh suggested that Ralph Clark should be included in the letter as he had included this in the budget. Council concurred that a letter be sent to both Supervisor Riley and Supervisor Clark. PROGRESS OF IMPROVING BRYAN AND BROWNING Councilman Sharp asked what the progress was of improving Bryan and Browning. Bob Ledendecker, City Engineer, responded that this involves the AHFP joint powers project of both the City and County for Flood Control and street widening. We are in the progress of design which will require the approval of the County of Orange. Construction is scheduled to be under way by July 1st and completion around Dec. 15th. This project does not include any roadway SE of the intersection. APPRECIATIONS Councilman Saltarelli expressed his appreciation to Bob Ledendecker and his department for the fine job he has been doing on capital improvements which include the Peppertree-Tustin Meadows crossing; to Mr. Wells for his long association and service to the City regarding the purchase of the Tustin Water Works; and to Chief Thayer and the Police Department on the excellent reports given to the City Council. PRICING AT GASOLINE STATIONS Councilwoman Kennedy asked about the report on pricing at gas stations and was informed that it would be on the April 7th agenda. VI I. AD JOU PCL~-LEi~T COUNCIL MINUTES Page 12, 3-17-80 MINUTES FOR THE WATER WORKS HEARINGS M_rs. Kennedy asked when the minutes for the Public Hearings regarding the proposed acquisition of the Tustin Water Works would be available and staff responded that they would be ready for the April 7th meeting. LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES ANNUAL REORGANIZATION MEETING Councilman Welsh reported that the League of California Cities annual reorganization County wide committee appointments is to be decided at the April 10th meeting. Don Saltarelli is up for a four year term and he said it would be appropriate for some recommendations from the Council. COUNTY ISLAND ANNEXATIONS Councilman Saltarelli would like the Council to consider once again looking at the problem of the County islands relative to annexations. A couple of bills have been introduced in Sacramento that would prematurely terminate the provisions of the MORGA Act, which expires January 1, 1981. After the election, the Council should reconsider filing on these annex- ations. TRAFFIC SAFETY ON FIRST STREET AT MC DONALDS AND THE POST OFFICE Mayor Schuster asked that a stacking lane into McDonalds be looked into as was suggested about a year and a half ago. There presently is a stacking lane into the Post Office. Bob Ledendecker, City Engineer, responded that there was some action but it was under Redevelopment funds but was not included in the budget. He said he would look into it and bring back a report for the April 7th meeting. Council concurred. It was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Saltarelli, to adjourn at 11:12 P.M. to the nex~ regular meeting on April 7, 1980. Carried. MAYOR CITY CLERK