6/27/1988iso
MINUTES OF A
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA
June 27, 1988
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rolling
Hills was called to order at the Administration Building, 2
Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California, by Mayor Murdock on
Monday, June 27, 1988, at 7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
ALSO PRESENT:
PRESENTATION
Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Leeuwenburgh,
Mayor Murdock
Councilman Pernell (excused)
Councilwoman Swanson (arrived at 7:37 p.m.)
Terrence L. Belanger
Larry Courtright
Betty Volkert
Stuart Axelrod
Capt. Dennis Gillard
Michael Smith
Ann Johnson
Anne La Jeunesse
Doreen Heater
Jeffrey .Klain
Scott Probst
SCE INFORMATION PRESENTATION,
City Manager
City Treasurer
Deputy City Clerk
BFI District Manager
Sheriff's Lomita Stn.
Southern Calif. Edison
Los Angeles Times
Palos Verdes News
Resident
Resident
Resident
Mr. Mike Smith made a presentation to the City Council regarding
two issues: (1) the Edison Company's concern regarding the dry
weather and fire hazard areas; and, (2) the restructuring of
electrical rates.
With regard to the fire hazard issue, Mr. Smith informed the
Council that the Edison Company is maintaining constant tree trimming
activities and has hired a contractor to perform brush clearing in a
ten (10) foot radius around the base of power poles in high fire
hazard areas, in an effort to lessen the potential for a fire hazard
caused by an electrical situation.
Regarding the restructuring of electrical rates, Mr. Smith
presented to the Council, using visual aids, the reasons for the
restructuring of the rates and the related impacts. Mr. Smith
explained that the reason the rates were restructured was to return
to a cost based pricing system for all customer categories. The
results of the rate restructuring was a slight increase in rates for
residential customers and no increase or a slight decrease for
commercial and industrial customers. The reason for this was to
encourage commercial customers to remain with the Southern California
Edison Company instead of seeking another energy supplier, since the
commercial and industrial customers provide the majority of the
revenues. In addition, the cost to serve residential customers is
significantly greater than to serve commercial and industrial
customers.
Councilwoman Swanson asked Mr. Smith if the Edison Company has
considered the conservation measure of using peak period pricing.
Mr. Smith stated that the rates are time based rates, such that a
customer pays a significantly higher price during on -peak hours. A
number of industrial and commercial customers are moving more of
their energy requirements into the mid -peak and off-peak hours. Mr.
Smith explained that, currently, residential customers do not get a
price break for using energy during off-peak hours. However,
off-peak hour rates for residential customers are scheduled to become
effective in the next two to-ahree months. Councilwoman Swanson
suggested that a public information program be undertaken to make
residents aware of the time periods during which energy can be used
at a lesser cost, and asked that the cities be informed when this
becomes effective so that they can also inform their residents.
CONSENT CALENDAR'
The City Manager advised the Council that the minutes of the
regular City Council meeting on June 13, 1988, should be amended to
read as follows:
On page 1, under "ALSO PRESENT", Steve Axelrod should be changed
to Stuart Axelrod.
On page 3, under "ZONING CASE NO. 35311, the last sentence of the
first paragraph should read "At the last City Council meetinq a
field trip ..."
00 Councilwoman Swanson moved that the Consent Calendar be
approved, subject to the above corrections. Councilman Heinsheimer
seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously.
(n APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Q The minutes of an adjourned meeting of the City Council held on
June 7, 1988, were approved and accepted as written. The minutes of
a regular meeting of the City Council held on June 13, 1988, were
approved and accepted as amended.
PAYMENT OF BILLS
Demands Nos. 2955 through 2978, in the amount of $23,777.26,
were approved for payment from the General Fund. Demand No. 2954 was
voided.
FINANCIAL STATEMENT
The Financial Statement for the month of May, 1988, was accepted
as presented.
OLD BUSINESS
RESOLUTION NO. 576: RESOLUTION OF DENIAL FOR ZONING CASE NO. 353
The City Manager explained that Resolution No. 576 is a
resolution memorializing the Council's action at their June 13, 1988,
meeting, at which the Council voted to deny Zoning Case No. 353, a
request for a variance for encroachment into the front yard to allow
for the construction of a garage, porte-couchere, and a retaining
wall, which would have provided for the expansion of the driveway
area. The resolution before the Council reflects the findings and
action of the City Council at their meeting on June 13, 1988. The
City Manager indicated a couple of minor changes to the resolution,
as follows:
Section 6, sub -paragraph 1, the fourth line should read "a
paddle tennis court ..."
Section 6, sub -paragraph 2, the last sentence should read "The
plan also entails construction of a new circular driveway, with
a retaining wall which will extend 49 feet into the rectuired
front vard;
Section 6, sub -paragraph 3, the eleventh line should read
"residence with attached garage, a paddle tennis court and ..."
The City Manager informed the City Council that the applicant,
Mr. Probst, has requested an 'opportunity to address the Council
before they take action on the resolution.
- 2 -
162
Mr. Probst addressed the Council, and expressed his feeling that
at the last City Council meeting the Council focused their attention
primarily on the garage. Mr. Probst wished to address a component of
the plan, the retaining wall, which would permit circular and
turn -around access on the property. He asked if it would be possible
to consider the retaining wall separately, and if it could be
approved as a separate item. Mr. Probst also remarked that the
retaining wall would actually encroach approximately 36 feet instead
of the 49 feet as stated by staff.
Some members of the City Council had concerns regarding the
procedural issues, and asked the advice of the City Manager. The
City Manager explained that in actuality, the Council took their
final action on this matter at their last meeting and this resolution
simply memorializes that action. If the Council so desires, they
could postpone adopting the resolution until they receive an opinion
from the City Attorney.
Councilman Heinsheimer asked if the Council were to take final
action would there be any restrictions or obstacles to an applicant
submitting a considerably revised plan and beginning the process all
over. The City Manager explained that, pursuant to the Municipal
Code, an application substantially the same as one that has been
denied is prevented from being considered again for a period of one
year after denial. Councilman Heinsheimer asked who would make the
determination as to whether or not a revised plan is substantially
different from one previously acted upon, and the City Manager
commented that that determination would best be left to staff.
Councilwoman Leeuwenburgh expressed her concern that the Council
might be trying to be too accommodating; that the applicant has
continually been allowed to submit revised plans, which is not
standard practice.
Councilwoman Swanson commented that in the course of the
Council's review, there has been no indication that any portion of
the proposed plan would be acceptable. Usually, such an opinion
would be expressed if that were indeed the case.
Mr. Probst explained in more detail the possible revisions to
the plan that he would like the City Council to consider.
Councilwoman Swanson explained to Mr. Probst that variances are
exceptions to the code and are granted only when hardship is
demonstrated. In the opinion of Councilwoman Swanson, Mr. Probst has
not demonstrated a true hardship.
Mayor Murdock explained to Mr. Probst that the only course of
action that the Council can take is to adopt the resolution or, if
the Council so desires, get a ruling from the City Attorney as to
when the City Council's action is final. Any consideration beyond
that would be inappropriate.
Councilman Heinsheimer remarked that staff had satisfactorily
addressed his concerns regarding the options available to the
applicant, proceduraly. It appears that the applicant can submit a
new plan and if that plan is determined to be substantially
different, can begin the process again immediately.
Councilwoman Leeuwenburgh moved that Resolution No. 576,
entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING
HILLS DENYING A VARIANCE IN ZONING CASE 353" be adopted as corrected
by staff, and that reading in full be waived. Councilwoman Swanson
seconded the motion. The City Manager, after making some
calculations, reported that the retaining wall would indeed encroach
49 feet, as previously stated. There were no objections, and the
motion carried unanimously.
- 3 -
163
OPEN AGENDA
Mayor Murdock invited comments from the audience. The Mayor
requested that comments be limited" --to five (5) minutes, and explained
that any comments would be taken for information purposes only and
that the Council would not and could not take action on any item not
on the agenda.
Mr. Jeffrey Klain, 1 Flying Mane Road, addressed the Council
regarding a dog attack upon himself by a dog at 28 Eastfield Drive.
This attack occurred on June 17, 1988. Mr. Klain flagged down a
police officer, Officer Johnson, Employee Number 222024, of the Los
Angeles County Sheriff's Department, and reported the incident. Mr.
Klain filed a formal report with the Los Angeles County Sheriff's
Department, Report Number 188-03380-1761-440, and subsequently sought
medical treatment. Mr. Klain informed the Council that he has filed
a case against the owners of the dog, Mr. and Mrs. Joel Hollingshead,
with the Superior Court and Small Claims Court. During his
investigations, Mr. Klain learned that there had been three previous
attacks by and four complaints on the same dog. Consequently, Mr.
co Klain feels that the City should consider a leash law before,
possibly, a child is seriously injured or killed.
Councilwoman Swanson requested that the City Manager contact the
7 Animal Control Office and the Sheriff's Department, and report back
Co at the next meeting why this dog had not been quarantined and if the
Q dog has been removed from the City. Mayor Murdock reported that the
dog is no longer in the City. Councilwoman Swanson commented that
this type of serious situation should not be allowed to happen more
than twice without appropriate action taken.
Councilman Heinsheimer noted that a petition had been received
from Mr. Yu -Ping Liu, in support of a tennis court application at 39
Crest Road West. This petition was received by the City Council for
the file.
There being no further comments under "Open Agenda", the Council
returned to the normal sequence of the Agenda outline.
OLD BUSINESS
ORDINANCE NO. 219: AN ORDINANCE REGULATING VIEWS AND PROVIDING FOR
ABATEMENT OF VIEW IMPAIRMENTS
Councilwoman Swanson moved that Ordinance No. 219 entitled "AN
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS REGULATING VIEWS AND PROVIDING
FOR ABATEMENT OF VIEW IMPAIRMENTS AND AMENDING THE ROLLING HILLS
MUNICIPAL CODE" be adopted and that reading in full be waived.
Councilwoman Leeuwenburgh seconded the motion, and it carried
unanimously.
NEW BUSINESS
COUNCILWOMAN SWANSON ELECTED PRESIDENT OF RTD BOARD
Mayor Murdock announced that Councilwoman Swanson has been
elected President of the SCRTD Board of Directors. The Council
extended their congratulations, and Mayor Murdock presented
Councilwoman Swanson with a bouquet of flowers.
ALLOCATION OF PROP A FUNDS
The City Manager reviewed the various options, which were
presented to the Council in a staff report.
Councilwoman Swanson commented that, due to time constraints,
she feels the best way to allocate these funds would be as follows:
1. Replace the three sets of bike racks at the entry gates.
- 4 -
RN
2. Give the balance of the FY 1988 Prop A monies to the City of
Rolling Hills Estates so that the monies can be exchanged for
FAU monies to be used for improvements to Palos Verdes Drive
North.
3. Direct staff to begin preparations now for implementation of
the City's participation, with its next appropriation of monies,
in the graffiti clean-up program.
Councilwoman Swanson moved that the Fiscal Year 1988 Prop A
funds be allocated as specified in numbers 1 and 2 above. Councilman
Heinsheimer seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously.
BFI AGREEMENT
The City Manager reviewed the status of the BFI Agreement and
the various options available to the City Council, as outlined in the
staff report. The City Manager explained that the Council has before
them two proposals: (1) a five year contract extension proposal
which would commence on September 1, 1988, and run through August 31,
1993; and, (2) a two year contract extension which would commence
September 1, 1988, and run through August 31, 1990. The rates that
are proposed in the first two years of both proposals are similar.
The advantage of the two year contract extension proposal would be
that it allows the City Council some flexibility in terms of other
alternatives in the future. Due to the fact that there is a great
deal of uncertainty in the area of disposal sites throughout the
County of Los Angeles with respect to the existence of the sites and
alternatives to sanitary landfill, refuse disposal rates are somewhat
uncertain. Both proposals reflect that uncertainty.
Councilman Heinsheimer verified that Proposal 1 (the five year
contract extension) is exactly the same structure that the City
originally had, and that the Council's input had a very positive
effect as demonstrated by the proposed rate increase being reduced
from 19.5% to approximately 15.7%. Proposal 1 provides for a 5 year
contract with guaranteed rates. If there are significant increases
in external costs to the contractor, the contractor can then petition
the City Council for a rate increase but the contractor does not have
an automatic right of adjustment. If the contractor petitions for a
rate increase and the City Council does not agree to any changes, the
contractor is then locked into the 5 year rate schedule. This is
exactly the goal that the Council is seeking.
Mayor Murdock commented that, additionally, if the landfill
price increase is less than 20%, the City has the option of
negotiating with BFI for a reduction in rates reflective of the pro
rata landfill price increase.
Mr. Courtright asked if the rates for the third, fourth, and
fifth year are absolutely guaranteed. The City Manager confirmed
that the rates for the third, fourth, and fifth year are guaranteed.
The only reason for petitioning the City for a rate increase would be
if the landfill price increases exceed 30%, in which case the City
would have the option of either granting or denying the petition for
a rate increase.
Councilman Heinsheimer pointed out that the issue before the
Council at the present time is to decide on a proposal as a matter of
policy and principle. Subsequently, a contract would be prepared
pursuant to the terms of the proposal that is chosen. The City
Manager said that, essentially, the only thing that is being proposed
to be changed are those sections of the existing contract that relate
to rates. In addition, a new section would be added to the contract
related to recycling. No other portions of the contract would be
changed.
- 5 -
1 s��
Mr. Stuart Axelrod, the BFI Representative, confirmed that the
City Council has an accurate.,.understanding of the terms of the
proposals. ;.
Councilwoman Leeuwenburgh asked if consideration had been given
to a one-year extension of the contract, followed by a Request for
Proposal. The City Manager explained that the Council actually has
three options, as follows: (1) a 5 -year contract extension; (2) a
2 -year contract extension; and, (3) a 1 -year contract extension.
However, it was staff's recommendation that either the 2 -year or the
5 -year proposal be selected, to allow time for evaluation of refuse
service provided by other major companies.
The City Treasurer, Mr. Larry Courtright, suggested that the
City request whichever refuse company is selected to submit a balance
sheet to assure that the company chosen is in good financial
standing.
Councilman Heinsheimer moved that a contract be prepared,
pursuant to the terms of Proposal 1, the 5 -year contract extension.
00 Councilwoman Swanson seconded the motion.
LO Councilwoman Swanson asked Mr. Axelrod if it is conceivable that
BFI might request a rate increase due to costs for capital
coimprovements. Mr. Axelrod stated that there is no provision in the
Q contract proposals for consideration of capital improvement
expenses. Costs for capital improvements would be strictly the
responsibility of the refuse company.
There being no further discussion, the motion passed by the
following vote:
AYES: Councilman Heinsheimer, Councilwoman Swanson
Mayor Murdock
NOES: Councilwoman Leeuwenburgh
ABSENT: Councilman Pernell
The Mayor indicated that a final contract would be forthcoming,
pursuant to the terms of the 5 -year contract extension proposal.
PUBLIC HEARING - CONTINUED
FISCAL YEAR 1988-89 BUDGET
The City Manager reported that the City Council has before them
the Fiscal Year 1988-89 budget. The City Council conducted a public
hearing at their last meeting on June 13, 1988, and continued the
public hearing to this meeting.
The City Manager suggested one change to the proposed FY 1988-89
budget, that an additional $100.00 be allocated in the "Memberships"
fund for administrative costs for the South Bay Cities Steering
Committee.
Mr. Courtright stated that the approval of the budget would be
contingent upon the final year-end results and fund balances.
Staff recommended that the City Council favorably consider the
approval and adoption of the Fiscal Year 1988-89 Budget for the City
of Rolling Hills.
Councilman Heinsheimer moved that the FY 1988-89 Budget for the
City of Rolling.Hills be adopted. Councilwoman Swanson seconded the
motion, and it carried unanimously.
166
MATTERS FROM MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL.
ABSENCE DURING MONTH OF JULY
Councilman Heinsheimer announced that he would be absent during
the month of July.
PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION,
Mayor Murdock reported that a work session was held with the
Planning Commission prior to their last meeting. The following were
in attendance: all five members of the Planning Commission;
Councilwoman Leeuwenburgh; Mayor Murdock; Mr. Mike Jenkins, the City
Attorney; and, the City Manager. Hopefully, some issues of concern
were resolved.
MATTERS FROM STAFF
SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM ADVISORY ELECTION
This matter is brought before the Council as a follow up to the
series of discussions that the Council had earlier this spring. It
was proposed, during the discussions last spring, that this matter be
put on the ballot as an advisory vote. It was felt that the best
date for an advisory election would be in November, 1988, since that
will be a Presidential Election and should result in a large turnout.
It was Councilman Heinsheimer's opinion that a city-wide
election would not provide any additional information. It was the
general feeling at their neighborhood meeting (the Johns Canyon area)
that it might be better to select regional areas of the City to use
as pilot programs and combine the installation of sanitary sewers
with other public works projects that are also needed. This way
small, neighborhood areas could be evaluated before a commitment is
made to proceed with a city-wide project.
On the other hand, Councilwoman Swanson pointed out that,
although the majority of the comments received during the public
hearings were negative, there were many comments made to her
privately in support of the project. Some people are hesitant to
speak in front of an audience and would feel less intimidated in the
privacy of an election booth. Contrary to Councilman Heinsheimer,
Councilwoman Swanson feels that an advisory election would provide a
better evaluation of the general feelings of the residents.
Councilman Heinsheimer remarked that if this matter is put on
the ballot, a specific proposal needs to be presented to the
residents, specifying the fee structure, etc., so that people know
exactly what they are voting on and exactly how much it will cost
them.
Councilwoman Leeuwenburgh expressed her support of having a
city-wide election, and feels that a specific proposal could be
prepared from all the information that has been received from the
consultants.
Mayor Murdock verified with the City Manager that information
packets would be mailed to all residents next week. The information
packets will include a summary of the discussions regarding the
preliminary alternative study which was done by ASL Consulting
Engineers. That summary includes many questions and answers that
relate to the installation of a sewer system as well as the care and
maintenance of the current system. The packets will also include
information related to the maintenance, repair, and construction of
septic systems. A part of the information that will deal with the
question of sanitary sewers will raise and highlight the issue of an
advisory election, thereby allowing 2 or 3 weeks to receive feedback
from the residents.
- 7 -
1.6'7
Councilman Heinsheimer suggested that it might be more
beneficial, and less costly,and�,,-time consuming to circulate another
questionnaire rather than to hold an advisory election. He believes
that the City Council would obtain more valuable information from a
questionnaire, and there would be about the same response to a
questionnaire as there would be turnout for an election.
Since a decision as to whether or not to have an advisory
election does not have to be made until the second City Council
meeting in July, the Mayor suggested that the Council wait to see
what kind of responses are received from the residents after they
have received the information packets before deciding on whether or
not an advisory election would be beneficial.
Councilman Heinsheimer reiterated his opinion that if it is
decided to hold an advisory election the voters should know exactly
what the fiscal impact will be to them directly, should the City
decide to proceed with the installation of a sanitary sewer system.
co Councilman Heinsheimer suggested that, once the information
packets have been received by the residents, this issue be put on the
City Council agenda and that residents be encouraged to attend the
meeting to discuss this matter. Mayor Murdock also suggested that an
7 article be published in the newsletter as well.
m
Q CITY ATTORNEY ON VACATION
The City Manager reported that Mr. Mike Jenkins has informed him
that he will be on vacation through July 12. Therefore, another
attorney from that law firm will be at the first City Council meeting
in July, if the agenda warrants it.
CLOSED SESSION
A closed session was not necessary.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the City Council, Mayor
Murdock adjourned the City Council meeting at 9:21 p.m.
APPROVED:
Mayor
City Clerk /j